Ugh.
I've voted R for a long time. Am I happy with the way things are going? No.
I'm pro-choice, anti tax, but pro public services. Life's a bitch.
I think it's a big drag that I want to vote "none of the above" again.

Mingo I was Pres of my frat my junior year. Don't knock it if you haven't tried it...it was fun. I'm pretty sure you would have enjoyed it ;-)

So just out of curiosity, what do you suppose draws your conservative friends to Fox? Do you think it might be they derive their news from a variety of sources and then are better able to form a more concise view of the topics? They then don't have to rely on the left-liberal major dailies to spoon feed them the news and opinions they deem essential. Nor do they have to be reliant on NPR or other over-the-air sources that, in my opinion, lean precariously leftward. If so, they are smarter than the average conservative that think Rush and Hannity are messiahs or guides leading us out of the wilderness.

I myself find Fox to be informative and well produced. Don't forget that Hannity does have Colmes to balance things out a little. It's up to intelligent people to separate the wheat from the chaff.

Mingo:

No kidding, despite the hype from the right wing echosphere for the last 8 years, Bush is certainly no conservative from what my conservative friends claim, I'd have to agree with them.

Hank:

They watch Fox for the laughs, and the baiting that they do on a nightly basis, you know, "Democrat Party', ORielly and his crap, one of my friends laughs out loud every time they say 'Osama', instead of Obama.
If you think that the 'Left Wing Media' bias thingy is true, you haven't been paying attention over the last eight years.

From the Iraq war, (where the Wapo, NYT ran Op-Eds supporting it) to the repeating of discredited White House and GOP talking points, presented as fact over and over again, the media is less biased I think, than just plain lazy.

They're in business to sell ads anyways.

What's easier, repeat a statement handed to you and tout it as fact, or actually dig around and see if there is any supporting evidence to bolster the statement ?
As we have seen the last eight years, the press has been willing and able assistants to Bush/Cheney/Rove, giving them credence long after they stopped deserving it. I mean how many times can you be lied to and still lend credence to the source?
Well the press acted as lapdogs to Bush and company, even after being made to look like fools for repeating and disseminating the propaganda from them.

I find TV News to be a waste of time when I do catch it, however infrequently that happens to be.

How anyone can watch TV and claim to be well informed is beyond me, truly it is.

Fox went to Federal Court and argued they are under no obligation to be factual in their reporting, they were under no requirement not to lie, essentially arguing they had a 'right to lie' when braodcasting their news .

That's about all you really need to know about Murdoch and Fox, isn't it ?

I am forced to read the S.F.Chronicle daily rag as that is the only paper in town. There used to be another,The Examiner,but that paper tilted to the right. Knowing that the majority of the population of S.F. leans slightly left of Marx, it doesn't take an advanced degree to figure out that the editorial opinions of newspapers reflect the political opinions of the surrounding community and those newspapers that differ will soon be on the ash heap.

I watch Fox to help in balancing out the ultra-liberal drivel but I also read several newsmagazines as well. The court decision in favor of Fox stemmed from a whistle-blower suit about rBGH in 2000. I can't defend Fox in this instance.


I'm not aware of any NYT articles that support the war as they have been very vocal in their displeasure. Perhaps you read an op-ed that grudgingly admitted the "surge" was effective in ridding certain areas of Iraq of Al Qaeda. Only those adamantly opposed to the war could view the recent turn of events post-surge as anything but a success. I am opposed to the war but I have to admit that things are better there.

The press has an obligation to report the news. "repeating an dissemanating" sounds an awful like quoting and publishing to me. There are plenty of news stories that don't see ink,that are tossed because they don't support the views of the editors. For example, you won't read an awful lot of stories of people defending their homes or property or lives through the use of a handgun. You will,however,see plenty of stories about "gun violence".

So K.K. you don't watch the news and think the papers are full of crap, where do you get your news? I hope your only source isn't Todd.

I get my news from Nookie...he's got his finger on the pulse, clearly.

Fish on...

Todd

P.S. I'm kidding.

In the words of one of our most brilliant founding father Benjamin Franklin:

He that lives upon hope will die fasting.

Here comes the orator! With his flood of words, and his drop of reason.

All human situations have their inconveniences. We feel those of the present but neither see nor feel those of the future; and hence we often make troublesome changes without amendment, and frequently for the worse.

It is a common observation here that our cause is the cause of all mankind, and that we are fighting for their liberty in defending our own.

Even peace may be purchased at too high a price.

They that can give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.

He that lie down with dogs shall rise up with fleas.

You got it backwards Hankster, Todd gets his news from me, I get mine from the SF. Chronicle........................

I am an ill informed, know nothing.......can't you tell ?

Both WAPO and NYT ran Editorials supporting the war in Iraq, prior to the war starting . Not that this matters in the grand scheme of things, just that most will claim those 2 papers were against the war from the start, when in fact they were not, and actively participated in the run up.

Most would be wrong......................

I think just about every paper (with the exception of the S.F.Chronicle and any paper they read in Berzerkly) supported the war initially. Remember, we were in that post-9/11 fervor.

Haven't been able to discern any know-nothingness. You obviously know something or you wouldn't post anything. Can't say I'm in total agreement with all that you post but that's what makes the world go 'round. Life would be a bore if everyone agreed with you.

Hey, by the way, how many of these post thingys do I need before I'm a "returning adult"? I've been a "juvenile at sea" for an eternity and I need a "change" that I can believe in.

I think 500 is your magic number on that Hank..................

then you are definitely not the triple-Izod collared toolboxes I'm referring to. You're a fisherman, that automatically makes you cooler than the typical brand-new-'vette-from-daddy frat boy in my opinion

I was a GDI at Oregon (can I say that out loud here? ) and was on the court of the Chi Omega sorority. Still am, for life. Why would I want to be in a fraternity when I was an honorary member of a sorority?

Seastrike went to college...???

That was just the beginning of the brain cell killing Stam.