Are You Serious?

[GH2001]

You can count the number of people who say that they are Republican.  You can count the number of journalists who are registered Republican or who have stated they are Republican.  You can count the number of times that a journalist gives a personal opinion on a story.  Your logic is flawed in assuming that these things can't be quantified.  It is not an opinion as to how many people who said they were Republicans also said they watch Fox News.  It is not an opinion as to how many editors, writers, etc. came from administrations of Republican presidents, especially from the Bush administration.  It's not an opinion as to how many of the officers, board members, etc. of Fox are publicly self proposed Republicans.  These can all be quantified.

The OWNED was simply a joke man. Lighten up Francis.

And how many people who watch Fox, work for Fox or who are ON Fox who say they are GOP doesn't define "how conservative" Fox reports the news. It doesn't determine the slant. The content, the writing and the attitude determines that. Thats a very subjective thing. Take Finebaum for instance. Tennessee Alum, has Barners on his show, has Barners call into his show....but anyone in their right mind knows that show isn't right down the middle. Its subjective. The kid in you still thinks everything is tangible and its not.

And I really really want you to engage Kaos in a debate on content and writing...please.....I want to see this....

[Vandy Vol]

And how many people who watch Fox, work for Fox or who are ON Fox who say they are GOP doesn't define "how conservative" Fox reports the news. It doesn't determine the slant. The content, the writing and the attitude determines that. Thats a very subjective thing. Take Finebaum for instance. Tennessee Alum, has Barners on his show, has Barners call into his show....but anyone in their right mind knows that show isn't right down the middle. Its subjective.

Something that is subjective takes place in a person's mind and is modified by the person's bias or perspective.  The identification of the taste of ice cream as good or bad is subjective.  The judgment of a piece of art is subjective.  Finebaum's statements that he is an Alabama fan are not subjective.  Sure, the reasons for his affinity of the team are subjective beliefs, but identifying him as an Alabama fan based upon his statements is not subjective.

Similarly, the fact that a journalist has publicly acknowledged being Republican is objective.  Why he is a Republican may not be objective, but the study did not deal with people's subjective beliefs as to why they were Republicans; it merely counted the number of people who identified themselves as Republican.  Additionally, you can objectively quantify how many times journalists insert their own opinions.  When you have a Republican journalist making opinions, and when the majority of viewers are Republican, it's fairly obvious that there is a Republican slant.  Unless, of course, you're suggesting that Republicans have chosen to watch a news station that has no slant, and only Democrats are guilty of watching news stations with Democratic slants.

The kid in you still thinks everything is tangible and its not.

The fact that I name off quantifiable things from one study does not mean that I think everything is tangible.

And I really really want you to engage Kaos in a debate on content and writing...please.....I want to see this....

Given the fact that we are discussing the value of studies, and in particular three specific studies to which I cited, I'm not sure that such a discussion would be relevant.  Regardless, I'm not sure why you want so badly to see this.

[AUTiger1]

OH NO! HE OWNED ME! ...by quoting someone else:

I haven't stated that Fox has an "extreme" bias, yet multiple people continue to argue with me as if I had made the statement.  As I stated, the initial purpose of me introducing the studies was to show that Fox News did have a slant, because the statement was made that Fox News had no slant.

No intent to own or anything else, just pointing out that it was said.   I could be wrong, but I think that comment is what people took offense to. 

[GH2001]

Something that is subjective takes place in a person's mind and is modified by the person's bias or perspective.  The identification of the taste of ice cream as good or bad is subjective.  The judgment of a piece of art is subjective.  Finebaum's statements that he is an Alabama fan are not subjective.  Sure, the reasons for his affinity of the team are subjective beliefs, but identifying him as an Alabama fan based upon his statements is not subjective.

Similarly, the fact that a journalist has publicly acknowledged being Republican is objective.  Why he is a Republican may not be objective, but the study did not deal with people's subjective beliefs as to why they were Republicans; it merely counted the number of people who identified themselves as Republican.  Additionally, you can objectively quantify how many times journalists insert their own opinions.  When you have a Republican journalist making opinions, and when the majority of viewers are Republican, it's fairly obvious that there is a Republican slant.  Unless, of course, you're suggesting that Republicans have chosen to watch a news station that has no slant, and only Democrats are guilty of watching news stations with Democratic slants.

The fact that I name off quantifiable things from one study does not mean that I think everything is tangible.

Given the fact that we are discussing the value of studies, and in particular three specific studies to which I cited, I'm not sure that such a discussion would be relevant.  Regardless, I'm not sure why you want so badly to see this.

Your beyond help man. Your indoctrination runs deep and your constant drivel gets old. Notice who the common denominator is in these debates. Have fun arguing with yourself in this one from here on out.

[Kaos]

Your beyond help man. Your indoctrination runs deep and your constant drivel gets old. Notice who the common denominator is in these debates. Have fun arguing with yourself in this one from here on out.

Dude exemplifies the hubris and ignorance of youth. 

A perfect example of why there are age limits for most political office.  Sad fact is that many don't mature much beyond the crackpot perspective displays. 

[AWK]

Dude exemplifies the hubris and ignorance of youth. 

A perfect example of why there are age limits for most political office.  Sad fact is that many don't mature much beyond the crackpot perspective displays. 

Iron-E.

Different view/perspective = ignorance.

Remind me again why the conservatives lost the White House and Congress last election?

[AUTiger1]

Iron-E.

Different view/perspective = ignorance.

Remind me again why the conservatives lost the White House and Congress last election?

I don't think the conservatives did, the RHINO's that claim to be republicans, yes they lost. 

[Kaos]

Iron-E.

Different view/perspective = ignorance.

Remind me again why the conservatives lost the White House and Congress last election?

Wrong.  Ignorance = ignorance.   doesn't have the capacity to recognize (due to his youth) that he doesn't have the experience or knowledge to understand half what he's talking about.  

They lost the election because of IDIOTS like the one referenced here who fail at comprehending the bigger picture and cling to unrealistic notions.   The best man didn't win, it was more of a dumbass American Idol competition.  Thanks to the ignorance and hubris of youth.  

Appreciate you making my point for me.  We're in the current runaway socialist situation precisely because of people like who lack critical thinking skills and don't know it.  

[AWK]

Wrong.  Ignorance = ignorance.   doesn't have the capacity to recognize (due to his youth) that he doesn't have the experience or knowledge to understand half what he's talking about.  

They lost the election because of IDIOTS like the one referenced here who fail at comprehending the bigger picture and cling to unrealistic notions.   The best man didn't win, it was more of a dumbass American Idol competition.  Thanks to the ignorance and hubris of youth.  

Appreciate you making my point for me.  We're in the current runaway socialist situation precisely because of people like who lack critical thinking skills and don't know it.  

Vandy Vol is throwing facts at you, and you return with an opinion that he can't see the big picture.  Then you group all people of a certain age into a group based solely on your opinion.  I don't really think you have a point, at least not one that can be argued and won objectively.

[Kaos]

Vandy Vol is throwing facts at you, and you return with an opinion that he can't see the big picture.  Then you group all people of a certain age into a group based solely on your opinion.  I don't really think you have a point, at least not one that can be argued and won objectively.

lost a loooong time ago.  Perhaps you should peruse the entirety of the thread before making a judgement based on the last two posts when his blatant obtuseness has reached critical mass and it's become obvious that he wears blinders, a blindfold and sunglasses.   

Your definition of tthe term "facts" needs serious work as well.

[AUChizad]

I don't really think you have a point, at least not one that can be argued and won objectively.

In other news, the sky is blue.

[GH2001]

I don't think the conservatives did, the RHINO's that claim to be republicans, yes they lost. 

Exactly - since when is John McCain a conservative? How's that for data reconfiguration?

[AUTiger1]

Exactly - since when is John McCain a conservative? How's that for data reconfiguration?

I have never know McCain to be conservative about a thing.  Just as I have never know Olympia Snowe or Susan Collins to be conservative on any issue, but b/c they have that R beside their name they will be lumped in when people talk about conservatives.  The conservative part of the Republican Party has been hijacked by a bunch of RHINO's that spent money like Democrats since 2000.

If you notice the downfall of the party (and the country IMO) was when Newt Gingrich and Trent Lott were ousted out of power by either their own party or Democrat witch hunts.  It hasn't been the same since. 

[GH2001]

The conservative part of the Republican Party has been hijacked by a bunch of RHINO's that spent money like Democrats since 2000.

If you notice the downfall of the party (and the country IMO) was when Newt Gingrich and Trent Lott were ousted out of power by either their own party or Democrat witch hunts.  It hasn't been the same since. 

THIS....

See - this is how they use the "GOPs did it too" argument. Bush started TARP. Bush increased spending. McCain stood for this, McCain stood for that - GOP's lost the election, shows you how backwards they are.  Bush and McCain are not true GOPs. As AUTiger1 said either RINOs or NEOCONS. The last time we had a true GOP running (Reagan) he wiped the floor with the opponents and did considerable good for the country whether you liked his spending policies or not.

[Vandy Vol]

lost a loooong time ago.  Perhaps you should peruse the entirety of the thread before making a judgement based on the last two posts when his blatant obtuseness has reached critical mass and it's become obvious that he wears blinders, a blindfold and sunglasses.   

Your definition of tthe term "facts" needs serious work as well.

Yes.  I "lost" because I pointed to facts, meanwhile your stance merely relies upon your age, which has somehow granted you the supernatural ability to definitively declare a news station's slant or lack thereof.

Completely reasonable.

[Kaos]

Yes.  I "lost" because I pointed to facts, meanwhile your stance merely relies upon your age, which has somehow granted you the supernatural ability to definitively declare a news station's slant or lack thereof.

Completely reasonable.

Facts?   

Facts? 

Facts??? 

You wouldn't know a fact if it bit you in the ass and then sent you a card of apology. 

Amazing how you distilled this entire discussion into which news organization is more slanted -- based on your precious (and utterly fucking useless) "studies." 

Facts? 

BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAA HAAAAAAAAAAA HAAAAAAAAAAAAAA....