Shameless use of the Moderator

[drh1965]

Originally Posted by MV

drh1965:



Seems saying "....Fox news, and such" with the "and such" addition covers all the bases.

Umm, no!

Perhaps an analogy will clear it up for you:

Methinks that the partisan politics might better be reserved for the those from California and such

[amytom]

cut from the methodology section of the report:

The poll was fielded by Knowledge Networks, a polling, social science, and market research firm in Menlo Park, California, with a randomly selected sample


hmm if the questions are being written for a university by a company in CA... that's two counts towards the left.


Gord I do have a lot of respect for your wealth of knowledge and hope to continue to learn from you and your efforts. I think this is on area where we'll just have to disagree.

[TaoJones]

Originally Posted by Guzzi

<snip>

And Fox just happens to be owned by Rupert Murdoch (LA Times owner), one of the biggest Lefties out there who is a buddy of George Soros, both zillionaires who contribute heavily to the DNC.

<snip>

JMHO.

Let's see . . . you went one for four there, Guzzi. OK for a weak-hitting major league shortstop with good fielding skills, but .250 in political observation doesn't cut it.

1 - Fox is owned by Rupert Murdoch: I'll give you a qualified "correct" for that one. It's actually owned by News Corp, but then Murdoch is essentially the owner of News Corp, so . . .

2 - Rupert Murdoch (LA Times owner): Not even close. The once great newspaper is the property of The Tribune Company, of Chicago. The Tribune Company was bought in a leveraged-buyout by Sam Zell in April, 2007, and the Los Angeles Times has suffered incredibly under his aegis.

3 - Rupert Murdoch is one of "the biggest Lefties out there": This is so funny, I hardly know where to begin. Murdoch is so far right, he outflanks (well, insert the name of your favorite neo-con here).

4 - Rupert Murdoch is "a buddy of George Soros": Murdoch and Soros agree on virtually nothing. Though both are billionaires (not zillionaires, whatever that means), only Soros contributes heavily to the Democratic Party.

So, with one qualified correct answer, perhaps you should attend more diligently to your homework.

TaoJones

[RickD]

I'm still voting for Mrs. Palin.

LOL

I don't care if someone thinks that's partisan or not.

And as for having "misperceptions" if one watches Fox, that's a load of malarkey.

People who listen to NPR only are SEVERELY misinformed, whereas people like me who get their news from MANY sources (including NPR, Fox and others) are very well informed because we can discern the difference in utter BS and nonsense and what is really being reported as factual.

It helps to have been to more than 40 countries of all the various types of governments available in the world and see for oneself the facts, and to be able to throw out the fictions that the media loves to create....

And did I mention I'm still voting for Palin? Oh, I did.

[RickD]

Originally Posted by GordMay

Point taken - I could have just said “news”; although those who primarily watch Fox News are significantly more likely to have misperceptions, while those who primarily listen to NPR or watch PBS are significantly less likely to be misinformed.

See:
Misperceptions, the Media and the Iraq War
At
http://65.109.167.118/pipa/pdf/oct03..._Oct03_rpt.pdf

Hmmmm... a little quick research and I discovered that 65.109.167.118 belongs to a little organization called "World Public Opinion.Org" --- giving Voice to public opinion around the world....

What a laugh. The very first article says....

International Poll: No Consensus On Who Was Behind 9/11

A new WorldPublicOpinion.org poll of 17 nations finds that majorities in only nine of them believe that al Qaeda was behind the 9/11 terrorist attacks on the United States.

In no country does a majority agree on another possible perpetrator, but in most countries significant minorities cite the US government itself and, in a few countries, Israel. These responses were given spontaneously to an open-ended question that did not offer response options.

(Photo: Tamara Beckwith)

Who cares what the facts are when "public opinion" wins, huh?

The very next article goes on to say:

All Countries in BBC Poll Prefer Obama to McCain


All 22 countries in a BBC World Service poll would prefer Democratic nominee Barack Obama elected US president instead of his Republican rival John McCain. Obama is preferred by a four to one margin on average across the 22,000 people polled.

Gosh, not one bit of bias there, huh? By the way, in case anyone forgot, the WORLD doesn't either vote for the President of the United States (yet, unless Liberals get their way) and secondly... the US really doesn't CARE who the rest of the world wants as President.

[David_Old_Jersey]

Originally Posted by RickD

the US really doesn't CARE who the rest of the world wants as President.

We () noticed.

But to be honest, I think picking retards has had a few negative impacts at home - even if mildly amusing from abroad.

Nice to see that you folks are lining up for your own "Tony Bliar experiance" - 8 years of the invisible dream Allah be praised

[GordMay]

Since they were more or less right, methinks I’ll close this thread by letting Guzzi & drh1965 have the last words. Thread closed.

Originally Posted by Guzzi

... drh1965 was correct in saying the comment was in itself a political shot and a form of getting your own thought out there while silencing the rest.
Not only that it was a backhanded way to get in the last word.
JMHO.

Originally Posted by drh1965

Hey Gord, why close a thread saying...
"Methinks that the partisan politics might better be reserved for Fox news, and such."
...when making such a statement is just as partisan? No chance you might be a liberal choosing to uniquely cite Fox News above...
Funny stuff

Sorry, I lied - I couldn’t resist taking the last word for myself:
I’ll change the questioned reference to read “partisan politics might better be reserved for the professional pundits, and editorializers.”