Is it ok to dismiss someone for watching FOX?

[Diogenes_the_Cynic]

@Mr_Smashy

It was the first ‘blame the victim’ situation that came to mind, and a situation that most people are aware of. Which seemed to be the point I was responding too.

Who are you referring to as victims? Victims of what? Do you actually understand what 'Lucy was talking about or who he was referring to when mentioned their “persecutors?”

He was talking about J. Edgar Hoover’s campaign of harrassment, spying, evidence fixing, wiret tapping and other disruptive tactics against the original Panthers, and speculating that this might have something to do with “driving them off the rails.”

Is it your belief that J. Edgar Hoover and the FBI were victimized by the Black Panthers? That feds harassing, spying on, fixing evidence and giving false testimony agisnt sicizens are somehow analogous to rape victims? If so, how? If by “victims” you meant somebody else, then who did you mean, and why did you accuse 'Lucy of “blaming” them?

[Mr_Smashy]

@GIGObuster

And I did also early, but you continue to miss most points…

The key was and still is that the OP adds the condition that the dismissed viewer also thinks that the source is “fair and balanced” or pure as snow. Once you apply that condition it is indeed OK to also dismiss those that deny the many times that FOX news has lied to the American people.

So, help me out here: your problem is that FOX uses the slogan ‘Fair and Balanced’? Or that their relatives watching FOX believe it?

Would also agree that only a fool would watch/trust any network, regardless of their slogan, in light of the fact that I’ve given some instances of journalistic malpractice by the lefty ones?

In case you (or others) haven’t figured it out yet, my piont is that all networks and media outlets have a slant, Fox, legacy, newpapers, etc. Anyone who gets all their news from just one source is either lazy or ignorant.

[Shodan]

@Lobohan

So, how about ACORN? Do you understand that ACORN did nothing wrong and was destroyed by lies on FOX News?

Here’s your problem, whether you realize it or not (probably not). Your statement is false, and repetition (as explained above) does nothing to establish it.

So, how about the Black Panther “scandal”. Do you understand that it is a non-issue.

Much the same thing here. The fact that you don’t want it to be true does not affect whether or not it is.

Thirty or forty years ago, when the MSM was reliably lockstep, you could rest secure in the notion that these kinds of things would die away for lack of publicity. But now we have news outlets that are not as deep in the pockets of the liberals, and so that doesn’t work as well as it used to.

Back in the day, CBS could have done their forged story about “Fortunate Son” in conjunction with the Democratic Party in an effort to elect Kerry, and get away with it. Nowadays we have the Internet, and that kind of dishonesty gets blown up in their face.

My kids are now grown up, as kids have a habit of doing, but when they were toddlers they sort of had the idea that if they stuck their fingers in their ears and closed their eyes real tight, I couldn’t see them. They lacked something called “object permanence”, which is the realization that reality exists outside subjective experience. A large chunk of the SDMB has this problem when it comes to politics - the apparent belief that if they just deny hard enough, and enough other fools agree with them, then reality changes and they won’t have to alter their ideas at all.

It’s a little unsettling to see it coming from people past the age of two or three or so, chronologically, but there it is. And another age-related phenomenon associated with it is tantrums. When you challenge this kind of denial - I do it a lot - those who use it as the basis for their political thought pitch a tantrum, very often. We saw it in this thread from Senor Beef, and we see it in almost every thread about Fox News.

The irritating thing is, I find it a bit funny nowadays. Because of the contrast between the kind of back-patting y’all do about how smart and open-minded and blah blah you are, in between the meltdowns.

Alternating between “the MSM isn’t biased” and “ACORN didn’t do anything wrong” and “YOU ARE SO PARTISAN AND BLIND AND HOMO(PHOBIC AND RACIST AND EVIL BECAUSE YOU WON’T GULP DOWN THE FLAVOR-AID” is kind of bizarre, but it is also kind of funny.

Regards,
Shodan

[Lobohan]

@Mr_Smashy

So, help me out here: your problem is that FOX uses the slogan ‘Fair and Balanced’? Or that their relatives watching FOX believe it?

Would also agree that only a fool would watch/trust any network, regardless of their slogan, in light of the fact that I’ve given some instances of journalistic malpractice by the lefty ones?

In case you (or others) haven’t figured it out yet, my piont is that all networks and media outlets have a slant, Fox, legacy, newpapers, etc. Anyone who gets all their news from just one source is either lazy or ignorant.

Lazy and ignorant is a good way to describe FOX News viewers in general.

FOX News lies in a way that the so called MSM does not. You are making an argument that everything is equal. That’s a stupid argument.

Can you understand that? Everything is not equal. Some things are worse than other things. And FOX News is much, much, much worse than the so called MSM.

The reason the right has a problem with the so called MSM, is it doesn’t tell them the factually untrue things they want to hear to support their fantasy view of the world.

[GIGObuster]

@Mr_Smashy

So, help me out here: your problem is that FOX uses the slogan ‘Fair and Balanced’? Or that their relatives watching FOX believe it?

Look at the OP to see the guidelines.

@Mr_Smashy

Would also agree that only a fool would watch/trust any network, regardless of their slogan, in light of the fact that I’ve given some instances of journalistic malpractice by the lefty ones?

Again, you are missing my point, the answer is yes, but as it was explained many times, only one or a couple of the mainstream networks out there in the USA could be called lefty nowadays.

@Mr_Smashy

In case you (or others) haven’t figured it out yet, my piont is that all networks and media outlets have a slant, Fox, legacy, newpapers, etc. Anyone who gets all their news from just one source is either lazy or ignorant.

And that is my point too, I have to assume that you also did miss it.

What is silly is to ignore the lies that FOX is making, more damming than the news the mainstream (really centrist) media is missing “on purpose”. And also silly: to continue to assume that most of the MSM is liberal.

[Mr_Smashy]

@Diogenes_the_Cynic

Who are you referring to as victims? Victims of what? Do you actually understand what 'Lucy was talking about or who he was referring to when mentioned their “persecutors?”

He was talking about J. Edgar Hoover’s campaign of harrassment, spying, evidence fixing, wiret tapping and other disruptive tactics against the original Panthers, and speculating that this might have something to do with “driving them off the rails.”

Is it your belief that J. Edgar Hoover and the FBI were victimized by the Black Panthers? That feds harassing, spying on, fixing evidence and giving false testimony agisnt sicizens are somehow analogous to rape victims? If so, how? If by “victims” you meant somebody else, then who did you mean, and why did you accuse 'Lucy of “blaming” them?

So the voter intimidation of this past election, in 2008, was justified by JEH’s harrasment of Classic Black Panthers in 1969. Got it. :rolleyes: And there was no political ramifications to the Justice Dept decision to overrule the slam dunk case (as the career prosecutor called it). And the fact that it took the Washington Times to uncover it (conservative media), and the liberal media virtually ignored it is completely coincidental.

[Lobohan]

@Shodan

Here’s your problem, whether you realize it or not (probably not). Your statement is false, and repetition (as explained above) does nothing to establish it.

The problem, and it isn’t mine, is that you have not bothered to educate yourself on the details of the ACORN case. O’Keefe lied in his presentation. The man they said was helping them sneak underage girls across the boarder was actually getting their info and immediately called the police and reported O’Keefe and his moron partner.

There is more, much more that was made up. The so called “voter fraud” was actually fraud by contractors against ACORN and wasn’t even voter fraud at that.

These are facts, you don’t know it because you don’t want to. Because you would rather have the angry lie about how the “libtards” are stealing the elections from the right-thinking, NASCAR-lovin’ mulletheads that make up the *real *'Merika!

Much the same thing here. The fact that you don’t want it to be true does not affect whether or not it is.

Again, the Black Panther situation was dismissed by a career prosecutor because it was a joke. The actual details of the story are a yawn. Read up on it. You owe it to yourself to understand the things that are making you angry.

Thirty or forty years ago, when the MSM was reliably lockstep, you could rest secure in the notion that these kinds of things would die away for lack of publicity. But now we have news outlets that are not as deep in the pockets of the liberals, and so that doesn’t work as well as it used to.

Back in the day, CBS could have done their forged story about “Fortunate Son” in conjunction with the Democratic Party in an effort to elect Kerry, and get away with it. Nowadays we have the Internet, and that kind of dishonesty gets blown up in their face.

My kids are now grown up, as kids have a habit of doing, but when they were toddlers they sort of had the idea that if they stuck their fingers in their ears and closed their eyes real tight, I couldn’t see them. They lacked something called “object permanence”, which is the realization that reality exists outside subjective experience. A large chunk of the SDMB has this problem when it comes to politics - the apparent belief that if they just deny hard enough, and enough other fools agree with them, then reality changes and they won’t have to alter their ideas at all.

It’s a little unsettling to see it coming from people past the age of two or three or so, chronologically, but there it is. And another age-related phenomenon associated with it is tantrums. When you challenge this kind of denial - I do it a lot - those who use it as the basis for their political thought pitch a tantrum, very often. We saw it in this thread from Senor Beef, and we see it in almost every thread about Fox News.

The irritating thing is, I find it a bit funny nowadays. Because of the contrast between the kind of back-patting y’all do about how smart and open-minded and blah blah you are, in between the meltdowns.

Alternating between “the MSM isn’t biased” and “ACORN didn’t do anything wrong” and “YOU ARE SO PARTISAN AND BLIND AND HOMO(PHOBIC AND RACIST AND EVIL BECAUSE YOU WON’T GULP DOWN THE FLAVOR-AID” is kind of bizarre, but it is also kind of funny.

Regards,
Shodan

I don’t think you are evil. I think you have no desire to find out if your beliefs are true. Hearing what you want to hear is comforting, I understand that. But it isn’t a good thing to base your ideology on.

[GIGObuster]

@Shodan

Alternating between “the MSM isn’t biased” and “ACORN didn’t do anything wrong” and “YOU ARE SO PARTISAN AND BLIND AND HOMO(PHOBIC AND RACIST AND EVIL BECAUSE YOU WON’T GULP DOWN THE FLAVOR-AID” is kind of bizarre, but it is also kind of funny.

Please let me know who is saying that “the MSM isn’t biased” or drop the straw man. Also stop screaming and pounding on the table, it is really not funny.

[Shodan]

@Lobohan

FOX News lies in a way that the so called MSM does not.

Which is the crux of the debate. Your notions about what is true and what is false are worthless, because we have already seen you make statements (“ACORN did not do anything wrong”) that are clearly false and other statements (“voter intimidation by the Black Panthers is a non-issue”) which is a (stupid) opinion, but which you asserted as if it were a fact. So if FoxNews broadcast something that contradicted either or both of these ridiculous notions, you would characterize this as a lie. But it’s not, and therefore your assertions are worthless.

You are, in other words, exactly what you claim to condemn in others - a hyper-partisan who dismisses any point of view other than his own, and does so based on lies that somebody told you.

Regards,
Shodan

[Diogenes_the_Cynic]

@Mr_Smashy

So the voter intimidation of this past election, in 2008, was justified by JEH’s harrasment of Classic Black Panthers in 1969.

No, that’s not even close to what he said. Read the post. He said that may have been a contributing factor to radicalizing the ORIGINAL party. He didn’t say it pertained to the NEW Panthers at all.

And there was no political ramifications to the Justice Dept decision to overrule the slam dunk case (as the career prosecutor called it). And the fact that it took the Washington Times to uncover it (conservative media), and the liberal media virtually ignored it is completely coincidental.

There was no “slam dunk” case. There was no case at all. There was no evidence of any voter intimidation whatsoever. If you disagree, please explain exactly what that evdience is?

ETA you still didn’t explain who you were comparing to rape victims. Hoover is reputed to have liked wearing dresses, but I doubt he ever looked all that enticing in them.

[Lobohan]

@Mr_Smashy

So the voter intimidation of this past election, in 2008, was justified by JEH’s harrasment of Classic Black Panthers in 1969. Got it. :rolleyes: And there was no political ramifications to the Justice Dept decision to overrule the slam dunk case (as the career prosecutor called it). And the fact that it took the Washington Times to uncover it (conservative media), and the liberal media virtually ignored it is completely coincidental.

Explain what happened in the Black Panther story to us in detail. You evedentially think it is somehow a major story. Explain exactly what happened, or at least, what you think happened. How many people were intimidated? How many times does something similar happen in the hundreds of thousands of polling places across the country? How many times is it reported to the news?

You are standing in a field, pointing at a blade of grass and howling at it in inconsolable rage.

[Mr_Smashy]

@GIGObuster

What is silly is to ignore the lies that FOX is making, more damming than the news the mainstream (really centrist) media is missing “on purpose”. And also silly: to continue to assume that most of the MSM is liberal.

The MSM only seems centrist or slightly liberal if you’re a moderate-to-hardcore liberal (again, like most of the SDMB, as we’ve shown over and over).

To most of the country, it the MSM is pretty damn liberal.

Surveys of journalists’ self-reported voting habits show them backing the Democratic candidate in every presidential election since 1964, including landslide losers George McGovern, Walter Mondale and Michael Dukakis. In 2004, a poll conducted by the University of Connecticut found journalists backed John Kerry over George W. Bush by a greater than two-to-one margin

Compared to their audiences, journalists are far more likely to say they are Democrats or liberals, and they espouse liberal positions on a wide variety of issues. A 2004 poll by the Pew Research Center for The People & The Press found five times more journalists described themselves as “liberal” as said they were “conservative.”

In increasing numbers, the viewing audiences recognize the media’s liberal tilt. Gallup polls have consistently found that three times as many see the media as “too liberal” as see a media that is “too conservative.” A 2005 survey conducted for the American Journalism Review found nearly two-thirds of the public disagreed with the statement, “The news media try to report the news without bias,” and 42 percent of adults disagreed strongly

Or let’s look at the Pew Research Center’s numbers right before the election

Voters overwhelmingly believe that the media wants Barack Obama to win the presidential election. By a margin of 70%-9%, Americans say most journalists want to see Obama, not John McCain, win on Nov. 4. Another 8% say journalists don’t favor either candidate, and 13% say they don’t know which candidate most reporters support.

A separate study released Wednesday by the Pew Research Center’s Project for Excellence in Journalism looks at the media’s recent campaign coverage and finds that McCain received significantly more negative than positive coverage between the GOP convention and the final debate.

I think this is pretty slam dunk. I await the ranting, denials, Fox-conspiracy theories to follow by you and Lobo.

[Lobohan]

@Shodan

Which is the crux of the debate. Your notions about what is true and what is false are worthless, because we have already seen you make statements (“ACORN did not do anything wrong”) that are clearly false

Exactly what did they do? You have been lied to and you are repeating those lies because you don’t know any better.

and other statements (“voter intimidation by the Black Panthers is a non-issue”) which is a (stupid) opinion, but which you asserted as if it were a fact.

Voter intimidation would have been an issue, but there was none. The current story is based on nothing more than a lie told by FOX News. It is not factual.

So if FoxNews broadcast something that contradicted either or both of these ridiculous notions, you would characterize this as a lie. But it’s not, and therefore your assertions are worthless.

Not at all. My assertions are based on the universe we live in. Not the jumbled, distorted place you think exists.

ACORN did nothing wrong. Explain in detail what they did, or admit you don’t know what you are talking about, kay?

The Black Panther “voter intimidation” story isn’t about actual voter intimidation. It was rightfully dismissed by a career prosecutor. Again, we are arguing about factual things, but you are bringing the lies you have been told here and presenting them as reality.

They are not.

You are, in other words, exactly what you claim to condemn in others - a hyper-partisan who dismisses any point of view other than his own, and does so based on lies that somebody told you.

PROTIP: When Shodan says, “in other words” he doesn’t really mean that.

[villa]

Once again, the research I have seen points to the “main stream media” as being socially liberal and economically conservative. That seems especially true with regards their treatment of organized labor.

Would you disagree with this as an assessment, or are you trying to maintain it is liberal across the board?

[Lobohan]

@Mr_Smashy

I think this is pretty slam dunk. I await the ranting, denials, Fox-conspiracy theories to follow by you and Lobo.

I would if you had made a point. Opinion polls don’t describe reality. They describe perception.

I notice that you are unable to answer my questions. I also notice that you haven’t admitted that you were incorrect.

[Mr_Smashy]

Also, let me be clear:

There’s nothing wrong with being a liberal. Or a conservative. I myself hold many positions on both sides, probably making me one of the (very) few moderates on this board.

But denying the truth only serves to stunt your intellectual growth and keep your mind closed (as well as dial up the partisan sniping), which doesn’t help America.

[GIGObuster]

@Mr_Smashy

I think this is pretty slam dunk. I await the ranting, denials, Fox-conspiracy theories to follow by you and Lobo.

Only if you ignore the previous poll posted by you…

The ones you are mentioning now are not dealing with the bias in the mainstream media but the bias among the reporters.

I 'll wait for your self denials.

Or better yet, care to deal with the “Climategate” lies that FOX made and continues to do when they are not making retractions?

[Mr_Smashy]

@Lobohan

I would if you had made a point. Opinion polls don’t describe reality. They describe perception.

I notice that you are unable to answer my questions. I also notice that you haven’t admitted that you were incorrect.

Sorry, you don’t get any more responses until you’re willing to debate with fact and data. Go ahead and address those numbers, which talk to the crux of both the OP and the evolved conversation, with your own (if you have them). I refuse to let you continue to try to change the subject.

PS In a poll about whether the media is liberal or conservative, without any bright lines of demarkation, what yardstick did you intend to use other than the perception of a cross-section of Americans?

[Diogenes_the_Cynic]

Actual quantifiable data regarding demonstrable political advocacy.

[Lobohan]

@Mr_Smashy

Sorry, you don’t get any more responses until you’re willing to debate with fact and data. Go ahead and address those numbers, which talk to the crux of both the OP and the evolved conversation, with your own (if you have them). I refuse to let you continue to try to change the subject.

Those facts are meaningless. If most people think the sun is blue that doesn’t actually modify the color of the sun.

You really don’t understand that, huh?

PS In a poll about whether the media is liberal or conservative, without any bright lines of demarkation, what yardstick did you intend to use other than the perception of a cross-section of Americans?

How about actually thinking? Say taking a representative sample of stories that are out there and judging them critically based on their factual basis?

Oh, right, I forgot, everything is equal is Smashy-land. :rolleyes:

I will also note that the last time you were unable or unwilling to answer simple questions about how you were utterly and completely wrong you also put me on “no more answers for you” notice.

Brave stance, that one.