Getbig Bodybuilding, Figure and Fitness Forums
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: OzmO on January 07, 2016, 12:09:47 PM
-
http://www.rawstory.com/2016/01/fox-host-president-obama-put-a-raw-onion-in-his-podium-so-he-could-cry-fake-tears-for-kids-killed-by-guns/?utm_source=fark&utm_medium=website&utm_content=link (http://www.rawstory.com/2016/01/fox-host-president-obama-put-a-raw-onion-in-his-podium-so-he-could-cry-fake-tears-for-kids-killed-by-guns/?utm_source=fark&utm_medium=website&utm_content=link)
Fox host: President Obama put a ‘raw onion’ in his podium so he could cry fake tears for kids killed by guns
Fox News host Andrea Tantaros suggested on Tuesday President Barack Obama had used a “raw onion” to produce fake tears for shooting victims during his press conference on gun violence.
Following Obama’s announcement that he was taking executive action to expand background checks and gun safety measures, the hosts of Outnumbered argued that the president was violating the separation of powers doctrine in the U.S. Constitution.
But it was the president’s emotional reaction while speaking about gun violence in Chicago that irked host Melissa Francis.
“What was really upsetting was the tears that he wiped away again and again,” Francis opined. “You want that for — I mean, we feel frighten about what’s going on with ISIS. And he can’t pull that kind of passion for anything about this.”
“I feel bad about those kids in [Newtown,] Connecticut,” she added. “Your heart breaks for them. But it’s only about this that he gets so upset about. And never about terror!”
READ MORE: Trump goes on Fox and defends Obama’s gun violence tears
After a commercial break, Fox News replayed a clip of Obama with tears flowing down his face.
Tantaros said that she didn’t buy the emotion because “he would have spoken out a long time ago.”
“This is how many years? Almost eight years, he’s almost at the end of his term,” she continued. “And you haven’t heard him go to Chicago and really speak out about this issue.”
“So, I would check that podium for like a raw onion or some No More Tears,” Tantaros quipped. “It’s not really believable. And the award goes to… we are in awards season.”
Co-host Meghan McCain agreed: “It just didn’t seem horribly authentic. And maybe it is, I don’t know him at all.”
“Go to your hometown of Chicago instead of talking about God-fearing Americans when ISIS is coming to their hometown,” McCain advised.
Francis said that she couldn’t understand how the president could cry for kids in Chicago but not the recent terror attacks in Paris.
“They say he’s just cool, that’s the way he is, that he doesn’t get emotional,” she explained. “We haven’t seen this in a very long time and it’s about something that feels political, that feels somewhat insincere, that feels like it’s not going to make a huge difference.”
“It’s like bad political theater,” McCain concluded.
Watch the video below from Fox News, broadcast Jan. 5, 2015
-
I think she was semi-serious. I don't think he faked his tears, but I agree with those who expressed frustration with his lack of empathy regarding terrorism. Remember when one of our citizens was beheaded and he responded by going to play golf? No tears that day, unless he had a bad day on the course.
-
Yup that Obama always get a pass from the media ::)
-
Yup that Obama always get a pass from the media ::)
We all know he doesn't get a pass from fox, thus why liberals insist they are the least accurate news source. Stunning observation on your part...
How are the other networks covering it?
-
Yup that Obama always get a pass from the media ::)
Your kidding right.....come on man...really!
-
obama is most destructive person ever in oval office and you hear nothing bad ever until Trump
no wonder Trumps no1
-
I think she was semi-serious.
what a wimpy non-committal.
-
If the tears were real (cough cough) then it must have been because he was running late for his tee time because that fake SOB cares about NOTHING but himself.
-
If the tears were real, they looked fake.
With that said, I think the emotion Obama displayed was genuine. But is that any surprise? Even people who vehemently oppose further gun control measures feel terrible about what happened. After all, whose heart doesn't break when innocent kids are killed.
But the tears are distracting us from the serious issue: that Obama's proposed solution solves little - if anything. It's just more bullshit. The solution to the problems we face isn't more laws and more regulations that affect only law-abiding citizens. Nor will laws magically stop criminals - if that was the case, we wouldn't need criminals courts. The simple fact is that criminals will find ways to get access to guns no matter what.
-
We all know he doesn't get a pass from fox, thus why liberals insist they are the least accurate news source.
https://www.google.dk/?gws_rd=cr,ssl&ei=YObFU6iiB-T8ygPkqoIQ#q=fox+misinformation
Stunning observation on your part...
Thanks.
How are the other networks covering it?
Nobody knows their ratings suck.
-
I would wager cnn or msnbc have the same misinformed viewers. It isn't a network thing, it's a general public thing. Sadly, most people don't keep up.with current events. Look how stupid guys like andreisdaman is on this very forum and he is a die hard cnn guy. He is likely the dumbest person on this forum, near mental retardation even, and he doesn't watch fox
-
;D
-
what a wimpy non-committal.
Says the girly man.
-
If the tears were real (cough cough) then it must have been because he was running late for his tee time because that fake SOB cares about NOTHING but himself.
We all know your tears on here are quite real.
-
I would wager cnn or msnbc have the same misinformed viewers. It isn't a network thing, it's a general public thing. Sadly, most people don't keep up.with current events. Look how stupid guys like andreisdaman is on this very forum and he is a die hard cnn guy. He is likely the dumbest person on this forum, near mental retardation even, and he doesn't watch fox
How much would you wager?
https://www.google.dk/?gws_rd=cr,ssl&ei=YObFU6iiB-T8ygPkqoIQ#q=fox+60%25+lies+msnbc+40%25
-
Well, those numbers certainly aren't driven by an agenda. If you put your faith in sites like politifact, you have real issues. Aside from that, we're talking about the competency of the viewer, not the network. It doesn't appear that you comprehended that.
-
Well, those numbers certainly aren't driven by an agenda. If you put your faith in sites like politifact, you have real issues. Aside from that, we're talking about the competency of the viewer, not the network. It doesn't appear that you comprehended that.
FOX news is consistently the least credible across ALL polls. It now even close.
The viewer who gets there news from anything other than FOX will on AVERAGE be more informed.
What did we bet again?
-
FOX news is consistently the least credible across ALL polls. It now even close.
The viewer who gets there news from anything other than FOX will on AVERAGE be more informed.
What did we bet again?
Just because you make that statement doesn't mean it's true. Sorry, that isn't how it works. Your polls from left leaning sites don't exactly come off as trustworthy. Politifact alone has had huge issues with credibility in recent years. You will have to forgive me when I don't find a network that employs Al Sharpton as a credible news source. Nor will I trust this same network (msNBC) when they do things like completely butcher a 911 call to make a person seem racist. I've already had a thread about this, so I won't go over it all over again, but you can't show me one instance that compares to msnbc's misconduct on the Zimmerman 911 call
-
Just because you make that statement doesn't mean it's true. Sorry, that isn't how it works. Your polls from left leaning sites don't exactly come off as trustworthy. Politifact alone has had huge issues with credibility in recent years. You will have to forgive me when I don't find a network that employs Al Sharpton as a credible news source. Nor will I trust this same network (msNBC) when they do things like completely butcher a 911 call to make a person seem racist. I've already had a thread about this, so I won't go over it all over again, but you can't show me one instance that compares to msnbc's misconduct on the Zimmerman 911 call
It seems you have 2 standards here. You have issues with MSNBC (which you should) and Politifact but have no problem taking your news from the least credible news provider in FOX.
Thats like saying your wifes cooking sometimes is a little to rich in fats so you will start eating all your meals at Mcdonalds.
-
Yup that Obama always get a pass from the media ::)
:D :D
-
what a wimpy non-committal.
I agree....see?...when I call him out by saying he sits on the fence and pontificates, now you know what I mean ;D
-
FOX news is consistently the least credible across ALL polls. It now even close.
The viewer who gets there news from anything other than FOX will on AVERAGE be more informed.
What did we bet again?
This is 100% without a doubt
-
It seems you have 2 standards here. You have issues with MSNBC (which you should) and Politifact but have no problem taking your news from the least credible news provider in FOX.
Thats like saying your wifes cooking sometimes is a little to rich in fats so you will start eating all your meals at Mcdonalds.
It seems you misinterpret my standards. I never praise fox as being unbiased, and I've commented on their bias on multiple occassions. I have to get my news from somewhere and fox more closely aligns with my beliefs. That isn't to say I take everything they say as fact as you and many others do with liberal media and sites like politifact. I question everything I get from fox, whereas you are gullible enough to believe sites like politifact, at face value.
So you see, my standard isn't that I give fox a pass. On the contrary, I know they have a bias, but you don't see me gloating that they are more honest than msnbc, cnn, etc. You've never once seen me.link a fox article as evidence, and you wont. I contend that fox is no more dishonest than the liberal media, and in many cases (editing of the zimmerman 911 call), you would never see fox engage in that sort of deliberate dishonesty to do things like stoke racial tension for ratings
-
It seems you misinterpret my standards. I never praise fox as being unbiased, and I've commented on their bias on multiple occassions. I have to get my news from somewhere and fox more closely aligns with my beliefs. That isn't to say I take everything they say as fact as you and many others do with liberal media and sites like politifact. I question everything I get from fox, whereas you are gullible enough to believe sites like politifact, at face value.
So you see, my standard isn't that I give fox a pass. On the contrary, I know they have a bias, but you don't see me gloating that they are more honest than msnbc, cnn, etc. You've never once seen me.link a fox article as evidence, and you wont. I contend that fox is no more dishonest than the liberal media, and in many cases (editing of the zimmerman 911 call), you would never see fox engage in that sort of deliberate dishonesty to do things like stoke racial tension for ratings
And here lies the problem. You watch news and attain knowledge to confirm your existing beliefs (even though the said knowledge is in fact BS) instead of using knowledge to form and expand those beliefs. Its like the difference between a religous nut and a scientist.
-
And here lies the problem. You watch news and attain knowledge to confirm your existing beliefs (even though the said knowledge is in fact BS) instead of using knowledge to form and expand those beliefs. Its like the difference between a religous nut and a scientist.
I think we are exaggerating I a bit here, chicken little. Some of what fox has is biased and opinion leaning to the right, some of it merely represents current events. The same could be said for msnbc, cnn, etc with them leaning to the left. I watch/analyze fox and come up with my on conclusions after doing research. I would never take anything Sean hannity says at face value. You watch cnn/msnbc and take it as the truth. One has to be willing to examine their own beliefs/accept the possibilty of them being wrong to get honesty and I do that. You parroting politifact's numbers merely because they support your argument tells me the you don't act similarly
-
I think we are exaggerating I a bit here, chicken little. Some of what fox has is biased and opinion leaning to the right, some of it merely represents current events. The same could be said for msnbc, cnn, etc with them leaning to the left. I watch/analyze fox and come up with my on conclusions after doing research. I would never take anything Sean hannity says at face value. You watch cnn/msnbc and take it as the truth. One has to be willing to examine their own beliefs/accept the possibilty of them being wrong to get honesty and I do that. You parroting politifact's numbers merely because they support your argument tells me the you don't act similarly
Politifact numbers had MSNBC in the number 2 spot regarding regarding false information. So how is this supporting MSNBC again?
-
Politifact numbers had MSNBC in the number 2 spot regarding regarding false information. So how is this supporting MSNBC again?
It's supporting msnbc because they are likely actually 1. They had no choice to put msnbc as 2. Where else were they going to put them, given the networks they analyzed?
We are talking about the network that employs al sharpton. If they didn't include msnbc high on there list, it would seem rather suspect
-
It's supporting msnbc because they are likely actually 1. They had no choice to put msnbc as 2. Where else were they going to put them, given the networks they analyzed?
We are talking about the network that employs al sharpton. If they didn't include msnbc high on there list, it would seem rather suspect
Okay. So every single of all the numerous study's that shows FOX as the least credibile "news" network is actually leftist propaganda?
-
Okay. So every single of all the numerous study's that shows FOX as the least credibile "news" network is actually leftist propaganda?
What "every single of all" are you referring to? Do you mean if I google "fox misinformation" like you did? Gimme a sec to Google "obama is the antichrist", since that is how we get our facts.
-
What "every single of all" are you referring to? Do you mean if I google "fox misinformation" like you did? Gimme a sec to Google "obama is the antichrist", since that is how we get our facts.
Show me a study that examines Obama's connection with the devil and i will take a look at it.
-
Show me a study that examines Obama's connection with the devil and i will take a look at it.
I'm still waiting for you to show me a study that fox is the least credible.
-
I'm still waiting for you to show me a study that fox is the least credible.
Not all of them are studies but:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/kenrapoza/2011/11/21/fox-news-viewers-uninformed-npr-listeners-not-poll-suggests/#2715e4857a0b4748760e6189
http://www.businessinsider.com/study-watching-fox-news-makes-you-less-informed-than-watching-no-news-at-all-2012-5?IR=T
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/10/23/1338538/--The-Science-Of-Fox-News-Why-Its-Viewers-Are-The-Most-Misinformed
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/news/fox-news-viewers-misinformed/
http://www.inquisitr.com/2105906/fox-news-viewers-least-informed-among-media-consumers-says-new-study-by-former-reagan-adviser/
http://dcinno.streetwise.co/2014/02/07/study-people-who-dont-watch-the-news-are-more-informed-than-fox-viewers/
-
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2012/05/23/university-study-determines-fox-news-has-least-informed-national-audience-based-on-these-questions/
http://mediamatters.org/blog/2011/11/22/seven-surveys-make-a-trend-for-fox-and-viewers/167217
http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2011/11/22/374434/fox-news-viewers-misinformed-study-jon-stewart/
http://www.poynter.org/2012/survey-nprs-listeners-best-informed-fox-news-viewers-worst-informed/174826/
All liberal propaganda of course.
-
Not all of them are studies but:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/kenrapoza/2011/11/21/fox-news-viewers-uninformed-npr-listeners-not-poll-suggests/#2715e4857a0b4748760e6189
http://www.businessinsider.com/study-watching-fox-news-makes-you-less-informed-than-watching-no-news-at-all-2012-5?IR=T
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/10/23/1338538/--The-Science-Of-Fox-News-Why-Its-Viewers-Are-The-Most-Misinformed
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/news/fox-news-viewers-misinformed/
http://www.inquisitr.com/2105906/fox-news-viewers-least-informed-among-media-consumers-says-new-study-by-former-reagan-adviser/
http://dcinno.streetwise.co/2014/02/07/study-people-who-dont-watch-the-news-are-more-informed-than-fox-viewers/
If you can't find a study to show that fox is less credible, just say so. It won't be the first time in your life your told a lie. As it stands, you are linking multiple links about the competency of fox viewers. None of them actually provide the parameters of the survey, but that really doesn't have anything to do with fox credibility here.
If you would have made the argument that fox news viewers are the biggest idiots, than your shitty links with little to no evidence would have at least attempted to address that. But that's not what you said. You said fox news is the least credible.
Since you seem to have a competency problem, let me give you an analogy. I can have the best physicist in the world explain the laws of physics to a mongaloid, and he may not understand it. That doesn't mean the physicist was lying, it means the mongaloid didn't understand it.
See where I'm going here?
By the way, you didn't cite multiple studies. You cited multiple sources relying on the same 8 question survey conducted over the phone to 1000 people. That is your damning evidence
-
So what you are saying is that FOX is infact very informative and delivers correct and factual news, however their viewers are unable to process it and somehow leaves them disoriented and uninformed?
-
If you can't find a study to show that fox is less credible, just say so. It won't be the first time in your life your told a lie. As it stands, you are linking multiple links about the competency of fox viewers. None of them actually provide the parameters of the survey, but that really doesn't have anything to do with fox credibility here.
If you would have made the argument that fox news viewers are the biggest idiots, than your shitty links with little to no evidence would have at least attempted to address that. But that's not what you said. You said fox news is the least credible.
Since you seem to have a competency problem, let me give you an analogy. I can have the best physicist in the world explain the laws of physics to a mongaloid, and he may not understand it. That doesn't mean the physicist was lying, it means the mongaloid didn't understand it.
See where I'm going here?
By the way, you didn't cite multiple studies. You cited multiple sources relying on the same 8 question survey conducted over the phone to 1000 people. That is your damning evidence
I have provided several links some of them university studies. You have provided nothing to the discussion. If you had the same standard for yourself that you have for others you would'nt post at all.
-
Dude...Fox is a major news outlet. You can try all you want to disparge them but you're an idiot. The links provided are not in anyway shape or form unbiased sources. Have you ever worked with anybody from Fox News. You do realize that most of the behind the seens folks have all worked for the other networks as well. The older on air talent has jumped around. I listen to NPR and can tell immediatly when their full of shit and when they work to provide both sides of the story. Fox has their slant, as does Cnn and MSNBC. Fox wins hands down because they do a better job of usually giving both sides even if the lefties don't get as much air time. Watch MSNBC...its two libs jerking each other off on most topics.
-
I have provided several links some of them university studies. You have provided nothing to the discussion. If you had the same standard for yourself that you have for others you would'nt post at all.
You've provided several links quoting the same 8 question phone survey. Let's not call that a university study, shall we. I don't have any standard that I'm applying to you that I wouldn't apply to myself. You contended fox is hands down the most dishonest network and said you have several studies showing as much. I just asked for the proof.
Im not gonna rehash the whole thread, but if you refer to the first page, I conceded fox absolutely has a bias as I would be blind to do otherwise. Mr argument was I suspect they deviate away from the facts no less than the other networks, and in some cases (msnbc), I think they are more honest.
-
Dude...Fox is a major news outlet. You can try all you want to disparge them but you're an idiot. The links provided are not in anyway shape or form unbiased sources. Have you ever worked with anybody from Fox News. You do realize that most of the behind the seens folks have all worked for the other networks as well. The older on air talent has jumped around. I listen to NPR and can tell immediatly when their full of shit and when they work to provide both sides of the story. Fox has their slant, as does Cnn and MSNBC. Fox wins hands down because they do a better job of usually giving both sides even if the lefties don't get as much air time. Watch MSNBC...its two libs jerking each other off on most topics.
I was actually courteous enough to read his links. Most if not all of them rely on the same 8 question phone survey. Have you read those questions. It's laughable that an 8 question survey of that nature is what all the liberals have been using as their evidence that fox is more.dishonest.
-
So what you are saying is that FOX is infact very informative and delivers correct and factual news, however their viewers are unable to process it and somehow leaves them disoriented and uninformed?
What I'm saying is that I'm not going to speculate as to what info an 8 question random phone survey established. I'm not going to speculate to the intellect of the viewers off that little of information. What i do know is that it has no direct correlation to the quality of news fox distributes.
I can link you videos from the Waters world tv show all day to demonstrate how idiotic liberals are. Then again, that would be dishonest of me and in no way represent any significant sample size
-
I have provided several links some of them university studies. You have provided nothing to the discussion. If you had the same standard for yourself that you have for others you would'nt post at all.
Whork, you have to understand that no matter what evidence you show them they wont believe it...which I why I rarely go search for evidence since its just a massive waste of time......remember to guys like these, the earth is 6000 years old and the female body has a mechanism in place to shut itself down and prevent itself from getting pregnant when raped. They just don't care about facts because they like swallowing the FOX Kool-Aid
This is why I have decided only to talk to....... you know.....RATIONAL people from now on
-
Whork, you have to understand that no matter what evidence you show them they wont believe it...which I why I rarely go search for evidence since its just a massive waste of time......remember to guys like these, the earth is 6000 years old and the female body has a mechanism in place to shut itself down and prevent itself from getting pregnant when raped. They just don't care about facts because they like swallowing the FOX Kool-Aid
This is why I have decided only to talk to....... you know.....RATIONAL people from now on
And he hasn't provided any evidence, which you can read above. The reason you stopped talking to me is because you are completely inferior and I make you look like an idiot everytime I engage you. That's why other members even chose to comment on your childish 2k posts, even though some of those members think I'm an abrasive asshole.
If you actually post evidence, we may acknowledge it. Seeing as you cherry pick the parts of an already biased article all whIle ignoring the other 80%, we don't call that evidence. We call it lying to push your agenda.
If you want to be a lying race baiter that worships obama solely for being black, that is your business. Just don't expect some of us to be silent about it on a public forum
It takes a special kinda pussy to go on a public forum and state his points, only to have an ignore list that is made up of members that are smarter than him
-
Dude...Fox is a major news outlet. You can try all you want to disparge them but you're an idiot.
Yup FOX is a major news outlet so they must be credible ::) I like how you make such a retarded claim but call me an idiot.
The links provided are not in anyway shape or form unbiased sources. Have you ever worked with anybody from Fox News. You do realize that most of the behind the seens folks have all worked for the other networks as well. The older on air talent has jumped around. I listen to NPR and can tell immediatly when their full of shit and when they work to provide both sides of the story. Fox has their slant, as does Cnn and MSNBC. Fox wins hands down because they do a better job of usually giving both sides even if the lefties don't get as much air time. Watch MSNBC...its two libs jerking each other off on most topics.
-
You've provided several links quoting the same 8 question phone survey. Let's not call that a university study, shall we. I don't have any standard that I'm applying to you that I wouldn't apply to myself. You contended fox is hands down the most dishonest network and said you have several studies showing as much. I just asked for the proof.
Im not gonna rehash the whole thread, but if you refer to the first page, I conceded fox absolutely has a bias as I would be blind to do otherwise. Mr argument was I suspect they deviate away from the facts no less than the other networks, and in some cases (msnbc), I think they are more honest.
To proof this thing to you, i would need you to only watch news from a network with a free press and news feed for a couple of years then come back and watch FOX. Then you would rolling around on the floor laughing at how staged and manipulated it is. Problem is you are to close to it as of now.
Are you willing to do this?
-
Whork, you have to understand that no matter what evidence you show them they wont believe it...which I why I rarely go search for evidence since its just a massive waste of time......remember to guys like these, the earth is 6000 years old and the female body has a mechanism in place to shut itself down and prevent itself from getting pregnant when raped. They just don't care about facts because they like swallowing the FOX Kool-Aid
This is why I have decided only to talk to....... you know.....RATIONAL people from now on
Yeah im beginning to suspect as much.
-
You've provided several links quoting the same 8 question phone survey. Let's not call that a university study, shall we. I don't have any standard that I'm applying to you that I wouldn't apply to myself. You contended fox is hands down the most dishonest network and said you have several studies showing as much. I just asked for the proof.
Im not gonna rehash the whole thread, but if you refer to the first page, I conceded fox absolutely has a bias as I would be blind to do otherwise. Mr argument was I suspect they deviate away from the facts no less than the other networks, and in some cases (msnbc), I think they are more honest.
Lets try a new approach then. I have provided multiple studies supporting my claim.
Can you show me any studies that points to FOX being credible and informative?
By the way is Business Insider a liberal stronghold?
-
You've provided several links quoting the same 8 question phone survey. Let's not call that a university study, shall we. I don't have any standard that I'm applying to you that I wouldn't apply to myself. You contended fox is hands down the most dishonest network and said you have several studies showing as much. I just asked for the proof.
Im not gonna rehash the whole thread, but if you refer to the first page, I conceded fox absolutely has a bias as I would be blind to do otherwise. Mr argument was I suspect they deviate away from the facts no less than the other networks, and in some cases (msnbc), I think they are more honest.
What is wrong with using 8 questions to see how informed people are?
You could probable ask a person 2-3 questions and get a pretty decent picture of this person's knowledge. It seems you want to find discredit the data because it doesnt support your argumentation.
Now post some data to support your argument. Im waiting.
-
The Blaze is actually founded by Glenn fucking Beck.
Liberal bias my ass.
Seems everything that doesnt support your beliefs is liberal propaganda.
-
Lets try a new approach then. I have provided multiple studies supporting my claim.
Can you show me any studies that points to FOX being credible and informative?
By the way is Business Insider a liberal stronghold?
Stop saying you have provided multiple studies. It just makes you look dishonest, stupid, or both. You've literally provided multiple links citing the same phone survey of 8 questions, or did you actually even read what you linked. When/if you actually post studies, i will consider them. As of now, you haven't done that
business insider is quoting the same survey
-
The Blaze is actually founded by Glenn fucking Beck.
Liberal bias my ass.
Seems everything that doesnt support your beliefs is liberal propaganda.
it still quotes the same survey. and you still dodge my original contention. you asserted fox is more dishonest. I'm gonna do you a courtesy here and say i take your 8 question survey at face value. It still says nothing of the network, it only judges the knowledge of the audience. Just like i've repeated that multiple times, and you have proven to illiterate to comprehend it, we can't fault the network for the viewers comprehension issues.
-
Since you haven't read your own articles, i'll help.
Questions: (all but the first two were open-ended)
• To the best of your knowledge, have the opposition groups protesting in Egypt been successful in removing Hosni Mubarak?
• How about the opposition groups in Syria? Have they been successful in removing Bashar al-Assad?
• Some countries in Europe are deeply in debt, and have had to be bailed out by other countries. To the best of your knowledge, which country has had to spend the most money to bail out European countries?
• There have been increasing talks about economic sanctions against Iran. What are these sanctions supposed to do?
• Which party has the most seats in the House of Representatives right now?
• In December, House Republicans agreed to a short-term extension of a payroll tax cut, but only if President Obama agreed to do what?
• It took a long time to get the final results of the Iowa caucuses for Republican candidates. In the end, who was declared the winner?
• How about the New Hampshire Primary? Which Republican won that race?
• According to official figures, about what percentage of Americans are currently unemployed?
4 of those questions are considered domestic and 4 are considered international. 1185 people were surveyed
People that claimed to only watch fox news were able to answer 1.04 and 1.08 questions respectively. people that watched msnbc were able to answer 1.26 and 1.23 respectively. It doesn't tell which areas were called. It doesn't tell how many of each viewer per station were involved. It doesn't account for honesty when the phone surveyer ask something like "hey, this is a survey, which news do u watch?" none of this was likely a real precise process.
I understand you aren't as intelligent as you or your mother had hoped. I get that, i really do, but stop saying you've provided multiple studies. You haven't and you won't because they don't exist. In the future, just say "i've provided a single 8 question phone survey with a deviation of less than a 1/2 of a question, outta 8 questions asked". It won't make you right, but at least it will make you honest
-
Stop saying you have provided multiple studies. It just makes you look dishonest, stupid, or both. You've literally provided multiple links citing the same phone survey of 8 questions, or did you actually even read what you linked. When/if you actually post studies, i will consider them. As of now, you haven't done that
business insider is quoting the same survey
And at the same time you have provided NOTHING!!
Nothing to support your claim other than your opinion which nobody cares about.
-
it still quotes the same survey. and you still dodge my original contention. you asserted fox is more dishonest. I'm gonna do you a courtesy here and say i take your 8 question survey at face value. It still says nothing of the network, it only judges the knowledge of the audience. Just like i've repeated that multiple times, and you have proven to illiterate to comprehend it, we can't fault the network for the viewers comprehension issues.
Okay then we agree that FOX wievers like yourself is to stupid to debate and engage in politics.
We have found common ground it seems.
-
Since you haven't read your own articles, i'll help.
Questions: (all but the first two were open-ended)
• To the best of your knowledge, have the opposition groups protesting in Egypt been successful in removing Hosni Mubarak?
• How about the opposition groups in Syria? Have they been successful in removing Bashar al-Assad?
• Some countries in Europe are deeply in debt, and have had to be bailed out by other countries. To the best of your knowledge, which country has had to spend the most money to bail out European countries?
• There have been increasing talks about economic sanctions against Iran. What are these sanctions supposed to do?
• Which party has the most seats in the House of Representatives right now?
• In December, House Republicans agreed to a short-term extension of a payroll tax cut, but only if President Obama agreed to do what?
• It took a long time to get the final results of the Iowa caucuses for Republican candidates. In the end, who was declared the winner?
• How about the New Hampshire Primary? Which Republican won that race?
• According to official figures, about what percentage of Americans are currently unemployed?
4 of those questions are considered domestic and 4 are considered international. 1185 people were surveyed
People that claimed to only watch fox news were able to answer 1.04 and 1.08 questions respectively. people that watched msnbc were able to answer 1.26 and 1.23 respectively. It doesn't tell which areas were called. It doesn't tell how many of each viewer per station were involved. It doesn't account for honesty when the phone surveyer ask something like "hey, this is a survey, which news do u watch?" none of this was likely a real precise process.
I understand you aren't as intelligent as you or your mother had hoped. I get that, i really do, but stop saying you've provided multiple studies. You haven't and you won't because they don't exist. In the future, just say "i've provided a single 8 question phone survey with a deviation of less than a 1/2 of a question, outta 8 questions asked". It won't make you right, but at least it will make you honest
Heres a new idea. Dont watch FOX and dont watch MSNBC.
You whine about how stupid MSNBC wievers are but then confronted with your own FOX fueled stupidity you use MSNBC wievers as a scapegoat.
"I might be an uninformed idiot but MSNBC wievers are as well, so its okay".
Do you have the same attitude towards your job and life in general?
"I might be a lazy bum who never accomplishes anything but the world is full of losers so thats okay"
-
And at the same time you have provided NOTHING!!
Nothing to support your claim other than your opinion which nobody cares about.
I wasn't the one to allege one news station being less honest than the other. I don't have to provide anything. That is your job.
-
Okay then we agree that FOX wievers like yourself is to stupid to debate and engage in politics.
We have found common ground it seems.
No, we don't agree on anything. If we took your 8 question survey at face value (which we don't), we might agree on something. The only one that is stupid here is yourself, and you prove it over and over again. Please provide the stats you say you have, not multiple references to an 8 question survey
-
Heres a new idea. Dont watch FOX and dont watch MSNBC.
You whine about how stupid MSNBC wievers are but then confronted with your own FOX fueled stupidity you use MSNBC wievers as a scapegoat.
"I might be an uninformed idiot but MSNBC wievers are as well, so its okay".
Do you have the same attitude towards your job and life in general?
"I might be a lazy bum who never accomplishes anything but the world is full of losers so thats okay"
You actually haven't proven fox to be dishonest, as we've seen over the last 2 pages. It is my intent to watch some news. That won't change. In that case, i will continue to watch fox until another station becomes more appealing.
you are falling apart at the seams and you sound more idiotic with each post. you have completely failed to identify fox as being dishonest and so now you scramble to whatever argument you hope might save u. That isn't going to work with me, as I've proven to be exponentially smarter than you and I don't mind wasting the time towards refuting your idiotic points.
-
Let me just say that anyone with critical thinking skills can see that FOX NEWS is biased and just plain wrong on many many issues....on that channel EVERYTHING is Obama's fault or most stories are skewed toward insinuating that Obama is to blame....many of their taglines and teasers do this as well...for example..
"coming up.....flood waters in Kentucky.......is the Obama administration doing enough to help the residents there"?
this is like throwing red meat to a pack of dogs....because in the mind of most FOX viewers EVERYTHING is Obama's fault....and then after a teaser like this, there's a commercial break which is often followed up with a conservative panel who ALWAYS says that ..SURPRISE!...Obama is at fault!...they have done this numerous times with different issues....FOX knows their audience well and knows what to say to get them aroused.......
FOX knows their audience aren't great thinkers...they are mostly angry reactionaries who salivate every time Obama's name is mentioned
They have only now just let up on Obama because he's become useless to them as a whipping boy since he is leaving office......
Also FOX was big time dispensers of the Kool-Aid in terms of the Benghazi story, the IRS story, and also kept claiming that the racial shooting in the church in SC was not a racial killing but a "terrorist religious killing"......WOW!!!!!
cue the accusations of being a lib communist pro-black racist in 3......2.......1...
-
nope...just that you're a fucking idiot
-
if we can find ONE example of a "news" station lying, then they're lying and shady. we see from this thread MULTIPLE examples from ALL of them - CNN, MSN and FOX.
At this point, we're just arguing about which dog's pile of turd doesn't stink. They all stink. They're all dishonest news "filters" designed to appease and engage their viewer base. Do yall get mad when BET says" this new Lil' Wayne joint is the hottest track of the year" when you obviously know Young Jeezy has the hottest track locked down? No, you just take that as an entertainment channel hyping and reporting shit to keep people watching. Cable news is no different.
-
nope...just that you're a fucking idiot
Great intellectual retort smartguy......but I guess thats why FOX NEWS is your netwoirk :D
-
Let me just say that anyone with critical thinking skills can see that FOX NEWS is biased and just plain wrong on many many issues....on that channel EVERYTHING is Obama's fault or most stories are skewed toward insinuating that Obama is to blame....many of their taglines and teasers do this as well...for example..
"coming up.....flood waters in Kentucky.......is the Obama administration doing enough to help the residents there"?
this is like throwing red meat to a pack of dogs....because in the mind of most FOX viewers EVERYTHING is Obama's fault....and then after a teaser like this, there's a commercial break which is often followed up with a conservative panel who ALWAYS says that ..SURPRISE!...Obama is at fault!...they have done this numerous times with different issues....FOX knows their audience well and knows what to say to get them aroused.......
FOX knows their audience aren't great thinkers...they are mostly angry reactionaries who salivate every time Obama's name is mentioned
They have only now just let up on Obama because he's become useless to them as a whipping boy since he is leaving office......
Also FOX was big time dispensers of the Kool-Aid in terms of the Benghazi story, the IRS story, and also kept claiming that the racial shooting in the church in SC was not a racial killing but a "terrorist religious killing"......WOW!!!!!
cue the accusations of being a lib communist pro-black racist in 3......2.......1...
The idea that you are criticizing critical thinking....Crticial thinking is your achilles heel. I don't know whether you have just not read the 3 previous pages or if this is a comprehension issue for you again. I've admitted 3 times in this thread alone that fox certainly has a bias, as do the other stations. You are just okay with their bias because it favors your beliefs. Just like you worship obama and credit him for everything, so too do these other networks.
Problem is conservatives aren't constantly citing some faux study claiming msnbc, cnn, etc to be the biggest liar. You guys constantly cite fox being the most dishonest. That is where this thread went and why I've made whork to look like a complete idiot.
In terms of the benghazi and irs story, they are actually stories. Incompetence was involved in benghazi and targeting occurred via the irs. that is an entirely different issue, not needed for this thread, but only a complete liar would claim there is nothing to see on either of those stories.
As far your last statement, I've never accused you of being a communist. I very much find you to be a coward racist
-
Great intellectual retort smartguy......but I guess thats why FOX NEWS is your netwoirk :D
I don't think the dumbest person on this board should comment on another person's intellect. I've made you look like you should be riding the short bus every time we have hadan exchange.
-
I don't think the dumbest person on this board should comment on another person's intellect. I've made you look like you should be riding the short bus every time we have an exchange.
Are you up to 2000 posts yet?????????????????????
-
Are you up to 2000 posts yet?????????????????????
You don't get the privilege of addressing me without my rebuttal. You bring it on yourself. You would be best to not respond to me, and these kinda things wouldn't happen to you.
-
I wan't responding to you...I was responding to the general conversation..I already know there is no hope for you so why bother....
now hurry back to the sex board and get that post count up...and please RESPECT AND ADHERE TO MY 2000 POST RULE..Thank you
-
I wan't responding to you...I was responding to the general conversation..I already know there is no hope for you so why bother....
now hurry back to the sex board and get that post count up...and please RESPECT AND ADHERE TO MY 2000 POST RULE..Thank you
You've absolutely responded to me\about me in this thread. Stop being a childish liar because you don't possess the wit to debate me. The sex board is your thing to do your cock worship that you tend to do.
-
I wasn't the one to allege one news station being less honest than the other. I don't have to provide anything. That is your job.
And this is the attitude that makes you a whining lazy loser.
-
No, we don't agree on anything. If we took your 8 question survey at face value (which we don't), we might agree on something. The only one that is stupid here is yourself, and you prove it over and over again. Please provide the stats you say you have, not multiple references to an 8 question survey
Again what is wrong with using 8 questions to figure out how much knowledge people have about a subject?
Its called collecting data. Go get an education they will teach you.
-
You actually haven't proven fox to be dishonest, as we've seen over the last 2 pages. It is my intent to watch some news. That won't change. In that case, i will continue to watch fox until another station becomes more appealing.
you are falling apart at the seams and you sound more idiotic with each post. you have completely failed to identify fox as being dishonest and so now you scramble to whatever argument you hope might save u. That isn't going to work with me, as I've proven to be exponentially smarter than you and I don't mind wasting the time towards refuting your idiotic points.
I dont think you know what refuting a point means. Yes you have mentioned how smart you are many times however you fail to show it. When someone needs to tell you how smart they are is usually because they are not.
Case in point: Instead of using data to support your argument you have given your OPINION like 7 times in a row without any data to support it. When confronted with data you try to discredit it and then offers your opinion again.
-
nope...just that you're a fucking idiot
You make a post that everyone assumes is done by an adolescent and then you call Andre an idiot? Thats rich
-
And this is the attitude that makes you a whining lazy loser.
Wrong again, a common theme for you. You accused a network of telling lies more so than other networks, so prove it. I didn't accuse anyone of any such thing.
-
Again what is wrong with using 8 questions to figure out how much knowledge people have about a subject?
Its called collecting data. Go get an education they will teach you.
Nothing is wrong with a survey. I'm just not as naive as you to assume it is all encompassing. I certainly wouldn't rely on an 8 question survey to determine if a group of people is more educated than another. It just seems kinda incompetent of someone that would do that. None of your links provided the answers to the questions, the breakdown of each network veiwer percentage, what was asked of each viewer to ascertain which news they watch. People like me, that place a high value on honesty, want a bit more than that.
At least you aren't claiming to have linked multiple studies anymore. I can't imagine how it took you this long to stop claiming that.
-
I dont think you know what refuting a point means. Yes you have mentioned how smart you are many times however you fail to show it. When someone needs to tell you how smart they are is usually because they are not.
Case in point: Instead of using data to support your argument you have given your OPINION like 7 times in a row without any data to support it. When confronted with data you try to discredit it and then offers your opinion again.
I know exactly what refuting a point means, and I don't think a person that is dumb enough to call an 8 question survey multiple studies should comment on that. I don't need to tell you how smart I am, I just chose to because I've made you look like a complete idiot this entire thread.
Once again, it is you that has to provide the data that fox lies more since you made.the accusation. As I've said, no such study exists that will tell me which network is the least dishonest, thus I cant provide it. I wasn't confronted with any data other than your 8 question survey.....that actually doesn't provide the data, just the questions.
This is where I call you stupid again and question your comprehension of what you are reading .
-
I dont think you know what refuting a point means. Yes you have mentioned how smart you are many times however you fail to show it. When someone needs to tell you how smart they are is usually because they are not.
Case in point: Instead of using data to support your argument you have given your OPINION like 7 times in a row without any data to support it. When confronted with data you try to discredit it and then offers your opinion again.
Very good analysis...absolutely true 8)
-
Very good analysis...absolutely true 8)
Except it wasn't a good point. He didn't confront me with data. He claimed to confront me with multiple studies which he didn't and still can't because they don't exist. I understand where you are trying to agree with him here, because you are hoping he has better luck with me than you have had. It isn't going to happen. He knows he is wrong and it's why he has resorted to the shitty arguments that he has. He has completely deviated from his original claim and he is trying to insist an 8 question study still validates his claim that fox is more dishonest. He is wrong and he knows it
He is just grasping at straws to save face, and you are just tugging at his nut sac as you do the multiple dick pics in the random sex thread.
-
Nothing is wrong with a survey. I'm just not as naive as you to assume it is all encompassing. I certainly wouldn't rely on an 8 question survey to determine if a group of people is more educated than another. It just seems kinda incompetent of someone that would do that. None of your links provided the answers to the questions, the breakdown of each network veiwer percentage, what was asked of each viewer to ascertain which news they watch. People like me, that place a high value on honesty, want a bit more than that.
At least you aren't claiming to have linked multiple studies anymore. I can't imagine how it took you this long to stop claiming that.
You use FOX news as your news source, thinks no data is better than data and make assumptions/lies about posters and demographics and yet you make a reply like this.
You have absolutely zero self-awareness.
-
I know exactly what refuting a point means, and I don't think a person that is dumb enough to call an 8 question survey multiple studies should comment on that. I don't need to tell you how smart I am, I just chose to because I've made you look like a complete idiot this entire thread.
Once again, it is you that has to provide the data that fox lies more since you made.the accusation. As I've said, no such study exists that will tell me which network is the least dishonest, thus I cant provide it. I wasn't confronted with any data other than your 8 question survey.....that actually doesn't provide the data, just the questions.
This is where I call you stupid again and question your comprehension of what you are reading .
No you dont. Offering your opinion is not refuting anything. Your opinion backed up with emperial evidence however is a different matter. Go watch Jon Stewarts Daily show. He made a career from exposing FOX as lying hypocrits. No wonder they appeal to you.
-
You use FOX news as your news source, thinks no data is better than data and make assumptions/lies about posters and demographics and yet you make a reply like this.
You have absolutely zero self-awareness.
Im still waiting for you to provide data....
-
No you dont. Offering your opinion is not refuting anything. Your opinion backed up with emperial evidence however is a different matter. Go watch Jon Stewarts Daily show. He made a career from exposing FOX as lying hypocrits. No wonder they appeal to you.
The burden of evidence is on you. You claimed that fox lies more and then claimed to have multiple studies to back it up. When confronted to provide these multiple studies, you then provided multiple links to the same 8 question survey addressing the knowledge base of particular viewers and nothing in regards fox's honesty.
Jon Stewart is a satirical comedian that made a career of ridiculing fox. Jon Stewart has been proven to embelish as well. Aside from that, I think this is my 4th time in this thread to say that I'm well aware of fox's conservative bias. Where does that have anything to do with them being more dishonest than the other networks as you originally contended?
-
The burden of evidence is on you. You claimed that fox lies more and then claimed to have multiple studies to back it up. When confronted to provide these multiple studies, you then provided multiple links to the same 8 question survey addressing the knowledge base of particular viewers and nothing in regards fox's honesty.
Jon Stewart is a satirical comedian that made a career of ridiculing fox. Jon Stewart has been proven to embelish as well. Aside from that, I think this is my 4th time in this thread to say that I'm well aware of fox's conservative bias. Where does that have anything to do with them being more dishonest than the other networks as you originally contended?
Yes Stewart has made a carrer from exposing FOX as a lying propaganda station not a news network. FOX doesnt have any credibility is not that they are biased they are intentionally sending out misinformation.
Stewart has more integrity than FOX and the GOP put together. Stewart was responsible for getting healthcare to the first responders something your beloved GOP voted down in favor of tax breaks for foreign companies.
-
Im still waiting for you to provide data....
I have already provided you with the survey which shows FOX viewers to be less informed than people who doesnt watch the news. Thats pretty crazy.
There are several thousand episodes of the daily show which shows how FOX is deliberately lying and spreading false propaganda.
The fact you think FOX is a good source of information just a little biased, tells me your window of information is very small.
-
I have already provided you with the survey which shows FOX viewers to be less informed than people who doesnt watch the news. Thats pretty crazy.
There are several thousand episodes of the daily show which shows how FOX is deliberately lying and spreading false propaganda.
The fact you think FOX is a good source of information just a little biased, tells me your window of information is very small.
There could be several thousands of episodes on msnbc or cnn if he chose to target them too, but he is liberal so he targets fox. And plenty of his stuff can be proven false, but you would know that if you cared to do an ounce of research.
Your entire argument has unraveled and now hinges on 8 questions that all demographics answered almost the same, with not even a half question deviation between each group and confidence that a comedian was telling the truth, which he always wasn't
It has taken you way too long and posting too much nonsense for you to say what i told you at the beginning of the thread. You have absolutely zero proof that fox is anymore dishonest than the other networks. You are just a jackass and a liar so you won't admit it because you've been made to look full retard
Next time you lack evidence and want to believe some thing anyhow, just say so. There is no point in making an ass of yourself an entire thread. You could have simply said that you are going to believe fox lies more, no matter the lack of evidence because you are an ignorant dishonest liberal,.and that would have been perfectly fine with me and I wouldn't have made you demonstrate you have zero.evidence.
You are so stupid you actually thought there were multiple studies on this until I pointed it out to you that you were linking the same survey results multiple times. That alone make me question your reading comprehension. Now, you just swear the survey and a liberal comedian are all the evidence anyone would need. Sorry, that isn't good enough for any sane person. notice the only idiot that agrees with you is andreisdaman, and that is only because he hopes you have better luck with me than he has. Sorry to disappoint him, you are near as stupid as he is.
-
There could be several thousands of episodes on msnbc or cnn if he chose to target them too, but he is liberal so he targets fox.
Will you give whork $1 for every clip he can share, showing Jon Stewart roasting MSNBC or CNN?
He surely hated fox, but he shit all over the others too. I'm guessing you didn't watch the Daily Show much, or you'd know this already.
-
Will you give whork $1 for every clip he can share, showing Jon Stewart roasting MSNBC or CNN?
He surely hated fox, but he shit all over the others too. I'm guessing you didn't watch the Daily Show much, or you'd know this already.
I never said he didn't ever mention other networks. It's a stretch to say he shit all over the others. He mentioned the others when their lies were absolutely too atrocious not to mention. His focus was definitely fox. The coverage was in no way in comparison with how he targeted fox, but I would know that because i have watched the daily show.
Nice attempt on your part to try and derail the conversation and save whork, but the fact remains he hasn't and can't provide any evidence citing fox news lied more than any of the other networks, because it doesn't exist and likely isn't true. And you would know that, had you bothered to read the thread. Given you are a liberal that tries to masquerade as being neutral, it's about what I would expect.
Do you care to comment on the meat of the argument, since you felt the need to chime in? Does an 8 question survey with a deviation of less than half a question and the satirical news from comedy central provide enough evidence for you to conclude fox is he network that lies the most? Please be straightforward with your answer and provide a yes or no in your long winded response.
-
I never said he didn't ever mention other networks. It's a stretch to say he shit all over the others. He mentioned the others when their lies were absolutely too atrocious not to mention. His focus was definitely fox. The coverage was in no way in comparison with how he targeted fox, but I would know that because i have watched the daily show.
Nice attempt on your part to try and derail the conversation and save whork, but the fact remains he hasn't and can't provide any evidence citing fox news lied more than any of the other networks, because it doesn't exist and likely isn't true. And you would know that, had you bothered to read the thread. Given you are a liberal that tries to masquerade as being neutral, it's about what I would expect.
Do you care to comment on the meat of the argument, since you felt the need to chime in? Does an 8 question survey with a deviation of less than half a question and the satirical news from comedy central provide enough evidence for you to conclude fox is he network that lies the most? Please be straightforward with your answer and provide a yes or no in your long winded response.
I already commented. ALL of the news networks are entertainment channels, tailored to meet the tastes of their target audiences. This is nothing more than MTV, BET, and VH1 saying a video is the 'hottest of the year'.
Anyone getting into "well, your network lies more than the one I like" is falling into a trap. They're all dog shit, we're just arguing which dog shit smells worse.
-
I already commented. ALL of the news networks are entertainment channels, tailored to meet the tastes of their target audiences. This is nothing more than MTV, BET, and VH1 saying a video is the 'hottest of the year'.
Anyone getting into "well, your network lies more than the one I like" is falling into a trap. They're all dog shit, we're just arguing which dog shit smells worse.
Which is kinda what I've been saying this entire time....
So you mean to tell me you don't trust the accuracy of an 8 question survey with a deviation of less than half of a question that is directed at the knowledge of current events by random people, to indirectly tell how honest fox is?
Funny, whork swears that is the most damNing statistical evidence in the world. He had said as much this entire thread. In case that isn't enough, a comedian makes jokes about fox too
-
The fact is that anyone who isn't a simpleton and who is objective with critical thinking skills can see with plain sight that FOX bends the news and is seriously biased to the point where they lose credibility and their logic strains credulity.. a person who thinks LOGICALLY and has DEDUCTIVE SKILLS (which I admit many people simply don't have in this day and age), can reasonably spot BS and propaganda....which is what FOX NEWS definitely is...they are TROLLING 24 hours per day.....
and yes they have been caught in serious bold faced lies...for example exaggerating the size of Tea Party rallies
I used to actually watch FOX NEWS all the time (plus they had hot chicks :D) at one point but had to turn the channel off because I just couldn't take the BS and stupidity anymore, hot chicks be damned...and this began to seriously happen when Obama was elected...before then, they were biased but reasonable
-
The fact is that anyone who isn't a simpleton and who is objective with critical thinking skills can see with plain sight that FOX bends the news and is seriously biased to the point where they lose credibility and their logic strains credulity.. a person who thinks LOGICALLY and has DEDUCTIVE SKILLS (which I admit many people simply don't have in this day and age), can reasonably spot BS and propaganda....which is what FOX NEWS definitely is...they are TROLLING 24 hours per day.....
and yes they have been caught in serious bold faced lies...for example exaggerating the size of Tea Party rallies
I used to actually watch FOX NEWS all the time at one point but had to turn the channel off because I just couldn't take the BS and stupidity anymore...and this began to seriously happen when Obama was elected...before then, they were biased but reasonable
And msnbc, cnn, and the others steer the honest path. Msnbc employs al sharpton. Msnbc edited a 911 call to incite a racial response from the black community. You can't cite 1 example of fox doing anything that irresponsible. Yet I bet you still watch them. Gimme a break. You see what you want to see
Additionally, a person that voted black and defends black no matter what has no right to comment on objectivity. You citing critical thinking is laughable.. I've pretty much shown those to be nonexistent in your brain.
In you we're talking about the person that posts on a public message board and then says "i'm not talking to you", when someone makes you look like an idiot
So, in summary, you started your last post with "the fact is" and followed it with your own biased opinion and nothing that actually resembled a fact.
-
And msnbc, cnn, and the others steer the honest path.
nobody is saying that.
-
The fact is that anyone who isn't a simpleton and who is objective with critical thinking skills can see with plain sight that FOX bends the news and is seriously biased to the point where they lose credibility and their logic strains credulity.. a person who thinks LOGICALLY and has DEDUCTIVE SKILLS (which I admit many people simply don't have in this day and age), can reasonably spot BS and propaganda....which is what FOX NEWS definitely is...they are TROLLING 24 hours per day.....
and yes they have been caught in serious bold faced lies...for example exaggerating the size of Tea Party rallies
I used to actually watch FOX NEWS all the time (plus they had hot chicks :D) at one point but had to turn the channel off because I just couldn't take the BS and stupidity anymore, hot chicks be damned...and this began to seriously happen when Obama was elected...before then, they were biased but reasonable
Now this might be the funniest thing I read today. :)
-
nobody is saying that.
Yes, that is actually exactly what andre and whork are claiming. Have you not been following along?
-
Now this might be the funniest thing I read today. :)
I find it strange that this intellectual asks me not to respond to his post when I make him look like an idiot, yet when he thinks he has an opening at taking a jab at me, he takes it....and he still ends up looking like an idiot.
I think this is what ozmo was referring to when he called his behavior chicken shit
-
Now this might be the funniest thing I read today. :)
Pontificators like yourself would think so..you don't even know what the truth is anymore
-
Pontificators like yourself would think so..you don't even know what the truth is anymore
Coming from the down-low brother who hides his homosexuality from his people in fear of exile. Go worship a cock on the random pic thread while ignoring the vaginas and tits.
-
I find it strange that this intellectual asks me not to respond to his post when I make him look like an idiot, yet when he thinks he has an opening at taking a jab at me, he takes it....and he still ends up looking like an idiot.
I think this is what ozmo was referring to when he called his behavior chicken shit
Yeah. It's pretty stupid and he even admitted it's stupid.
-
Yeah. It's pretty stupid and he even admitted it's stupid.
Not stupid at all...just choose not to engage with those who only come here for anarchy......certain posters come here just for racial ranting and have no intention of learning anything new or ACKNOWLEDGING FACTS...so why bother?..its just a permanent impasse...so lets just leave it that way...
-
Not stupid at all...just choose not to engage with those who only come here for anarchy......certain posters come here just for racial ranting and have no intention of learning anything new or ACKNOWLEDGING FACTS...so why bother?..its just a permanent impasse...so lets just leave it that way...
You engaged me in this thread, dummy. And i will agree, we have dumb posters like yourself that have no desire to learn or acknowledge the real state of the world, they would rather cling to excuses of racism for their shortcomings in life.
-
You engaged me in this thread, dummy. And i will agree, we have dumb posters like yourself that have no desire to learn or acknowledge the real state of the world, they would rather cling to excuses of racism for their shortcomings in life.
sigh......PLEASE ADHERE TO MY 2000 POST RULE....THANK YOU.
-
Not stupid at all...just choose not to engage with those who only come here for anarchy......certain posters come here just for racial ranting and have no intention of learning anything new or ACKNOWLEDGING FACTS...so why bother?..its just a permanent impasse...so lets just leave it that way...
Dude. Are you on drugs or something?
PLEASE RESPECT AND ADHERE TO MY 2000 POST RULE..THANK YOU
This is really dumb. You sound like a little kid. And you do realize all caps is yelling?
It is dumb...sometimes dumb people need to be reacted to in a dumb way...its all they understand.....whats it to you?......as for yelling, again some dunb people...........
-
sigh......PLEASE ADHERE TO MY 2000 POST RULE....THANK YOU.
sigh...Please adhere to your own rule and don't be a pussy. Don't come in this thread and address me and expect me to not respond. I understand you are a coward, but that's just common sense, and besides, we've already established your rule makes you a chickenshit.
Everyone knows you only have your so called rule because its the only argument you have for me. You certainly aren't gonna win on intellectual merit.
-
Dude. Are you on drugs or something?
What are you?...Iwantdick's defense attorney????????????????..is this is what my repeated destroyings of you have reduced you to??????????
-
Yes, that is actually exactly what andre and whork are claiming. Have you not been following along?
please quote them saying msnbc and cnn haven't told lies.
I think they're just saying fox is worse. Do you have their quotes?
-
please quote them saying msnbc and cnn haven't told lies.
I think they're just saying fox is worse. Do you have their quotes?
I'm not going to spoon feed you. In spite of the shit I give you, you are smarter than that. Read post 87 as an example. Andreisdaman is referring to the absolute absurdity of fox and even indicating they are trolling, since their claims are so outlandish. Does that sound like a person that is indicating fox is just the worst of the liars?
You know better and once again you are just being dishonest. i may be a prick, but i do everyone the common courtesy of reading every post and every link provided in a given thread that I respond. If you had extended me the same courtesy, you wouldn't be asking this question.
-
I'm not going to spoon feed you. In spite of the shit I give you, you are smarter than that. Read post 87 as an example. Andreisdaman is referring to the absolute absurdity of fox and even indicating they are trolling, since their claims are so outlandish. Does that sound like a person that is indicating fox is just the worst of the liars?
You know better and once again you are just being dishonest. i may be a prick, but i do everyone the common courtesy of reading every post and every link provided in a given thread that I respond. If you had extended me the same courtesy, you wouldn't be asking this question.
You said that is EXACTLY what they are claiming.
Then you spend 5 minutes giving us a detailed interpretation... explaining why you cannot just simply quote them. Then you attack me to end the post, trying to draw me into a debate.
We've been here for a decade on getbig. We see thru that. Post where they say "exactly" that, or don't. I have never seen them say CNN or MSNBC are 100% honest. never seen it.
-
You said that is EXACTLY what they are claiming.
Then you spend 5 minutes giving us a detailed interpretation... explaining why you cannot just simply quote them. Then you attack me to end the post, trying to draw me into a debate.
We've been here for a decade on getbig. We see thru that. Post where they say "exactly" that, or don't. I have never seen them say CNN or MSNBC are 100% honest. never seen it.
I did say that is exactly what they are claiming, and i stand by that. I didn't spend 5 minutes, it took me about 25 seconds to type that. I provided you an example of their beliefs. I don't know where i attacked you in this instance. I can tell you that you are a sissy and you pissed your pants and were a pussy for not confronting a man that slapped you in the face. There, I attacked you.
If andreisdaman comments on the absolute absurdity of fox news and their troll like tendencies, then we can deduce that his news source is above those actions and doesn't engage in those actions. It is a simple if-then argument.
I don't know why you choose to pursue this. You are going to ultimately look like an idiot
And for that matter, let's ask them. Do you, andreisdaman and whork, think cnn and msnbc are reputable news networks?
There, doesn't that get us to the point?
-
You said that is EXACTLY what they are claiming.
Then you spend 5 minutes giving us a detailed interpretation... explaining why you cannot just simply quote them. Then you attack me to end the post, trying to draw me into a debate.
We've been here for a decade on getbig. We see thru that. Post where they say "exactly" that, or don't. I have never seen them say CNN or MSNBC are 100% honest. never seen it.
He can't give you the quotes because we never said that...thanks for calling him out on it....we were ONLY debating the merits of whether FOX is credible.....we said they were not and explained that they have been caught in numerous lies and flasehoods and that they bend the truth and blame Obama for everything.....and I stated that ANYONE who has critical thinking skills can see that....he even stated that I did not give ANY examples of their falsehoods but I did when I stated that they were caught lying about the number of Tea partiers at a rally in which they inflated the numbers....he ignored that and said I didn't give any examples....
but instead of backing up and admitting he was wrong and apologizing, he goes on the attack...
of course CNN and MSNBC make mistakes...I have never seen CNN engage in an out and out lie......MSNBC are Kool-Aid drinkers as well and I have seen some instances of bending the news to their ideology as well but not on the par of FOX which is shameless in how they shape news to be anti-Obama and now anti-Hillary.....FOX NEWS is really a Republican ADVOCATE
When they claim to be fair and balanced thats professional trolling on a GetBig scale right there
you can argue the merits as to whether MSNBC is a real reputable news network.........but I think anyone who doubts the authenticty of CNN is just plain wrong.
-
Chiming in...
Either they said it or they didn't say it. Show it or don't show it.
For news sources:
If i remember the study that we are talking about here.... They were talking about the "guests" they had on the news, and the things they claimed as fact, where fox guests were 62% wrong or false, msnbc guests were 62% wrong or false and cnn guests were 11 or 20% wrong or false.
Kind of hard to directly lie about the hard news. Also there is the choice of what's reported. But if its a big story all news outlets have to report it.
Maybe BB can use his search skills to find the original thread.
-
Chiming in...
Either they said it or they didn't say it. Show it or don't show it.
For news sources:
If i remember the study that we are talking about here.... They were talking about the "guests" they had on the news, and the things they claimed as fact, where fox guests were 62% wrong or false, msnbc guests were 62% wrong or false and cnn guests were 11 or 20% wrong or false.
Kind of hard to directly lie about the hard news. Also there is the choice of what's reported. But if its a big story all news outlets have to report it.
Maybe BB can use his search skills to find the original thread.
I gotta admit, I never thought about this in any detail.....whether some guest commentators/analysts are constantly wrong about their views...this then brings up the question as to whether some networks are PURPOSELY putting commentators on the air who they know to be wrong simply because said comentator espouses views held by the network.....
Food for thought.
-
I gotta admit, I never thought about this in any detail.....whether some guest commentators/analysts are constantly wrong about their views...this then brings up the question as to whether some networks are PURPOSELY putting commentators on the air who they know to be wrong simply because said comentator espouses views held by the network.....
Food for thought.
That would be normal operating procedure. This is entertainment, not news. You put people on from varying positions of the spectrum. In a debate or interview there isn't a mechanism that provides the time to fact check every statement. So what happens is, the viewers original beliefs are simply reinforced and when another guest is "out talked" the viewers on the other side still hold on to their original beliefs.
Its the human nature of the times. We go into something with made up beliefs and tend to give attention to only those facts or arguments that support those beliefs. We don't objectively see every point of view. Everyone on Get big does this to some extent, just as everyone in our country seems to too. If feeds polarization. Doesn't matter if you are a democrat of republican.
-
He can't give you the quotes because we never said that...thanks for calling him out on it....we were ONLY debating the merits of whether FOX is credible.....we said they were not and explained that they have been caught in numerous lies and flasehoods and that they bend the truth and blame Obama for everything.....and I stated that ANYONE who has critical thinking skills can see that....he even stated that I did not give ANY examples of their falsehoods but I did when I stated that they were caught lying about the number of Tea partiers at a rally in which they inflated the numbers....he ignored that and said I didn't give any examples....
but instead of backing up and admitting he was wrong and apologizing, he goes on the attack...
of course CNN and MSNBC make mistakes...I have never seen CNN engage in an out and out lie......MSNBC are Kool-Aid drinkers as well and I have seen some instances of bending the news to their ideology as well but not on the par of FOX which is shameless in how they shape news to be anti-Obama and now anti-Hillary.....FOX NEWS is really a Republican ADVOCATE
When they claim to be fair and balanced thats professional trolling on a GetBig scale right there
you can argue the merits as to whether MSNBC is a real reputable news network.........but I think anyone who doubts the authenticty of CNN is just plain wrong.
Who ever said anything about me needing to provide a quote with you using the word EXACTLY. That is the argument of an idiot, thus why you likely support it. No you weren't debating the merit of fox only fox being credible, you were debating it as opposed to other networks. I've said this entire thread that fox is dishonest but no more so than the other networks. Learn to read. It's all right there.
And there you have it, he can't admit that CNN and MSNBC lie. He is crediting it to mistakes. This is why I said this is exactly what i'm implying, and he just confirmed it. That statement alone is his way of giving some ground without admitting they are lying. He refuses the admit that other networks lie just as much as fox, which was my assertion before 240 tried to idiotically make a point.
Funny that you bring up fox lying about teaparty numbers in the same post you bring up CNN's honesty. One of the first things that pulls up on the google search when "lies about tea party numbers" is fox lying.....and also CNN lying. CNN deliberately low balled numbers in many cases. It's all there is you really have an interest in it, but you only care about fox doing it because CNN only makes mistakes on occasion, they don't lie.
-
I gotta admit, I never thought about this in any detail.....whether some guest commentators/analysts are constantly wrong about their views...this then brings up the question as to whether some networks are PURPOSELY putting commentators on the air who they know to be wrong simply because said comentator espouses views held by the network.....
Food for thought.
MSNBC employs Al Sharpton so lets not talk about the honesty of guests. That guy is outright crinimal, but then again you are a racist so you likely hang on his every word.
-
Chiming in...
Either they said it or they didn't say it. Show it or don't show it.
For news sources:
If i remember the study that we are talking about here.... They were talking about the "guests" they had on the news, and the things they claimed as fact, where fox guests were 62% wrong or false, msnbc guests were 62% wrong or false and cnn guests were 11 or 20% wrong or false.
Kind of hard to directly lie about the hard news. Also there is the choice of what's reported. But if its a big story all news outlets have to report it.
Maybe BB can use his search skills to find the original thread.
Thank you for pointing out that its kinda hard to lie about the hard news. To hear Andre tell it, Fox is outright lying, when in actuality it is hosts like hannity providing their opinion, not the actual news. Fox does it, MSNBC does it, so does CNN. They all have hosts of tv shows that offer their opinion. It would be nice if they were to be held to a factual standard, sadly none of them are, which had kinda been my point. I'm not naive or dishonest enough to claim fox to be exempt from it, I just also make the contention that the others practice in the same dishonesty. That is all i've ever stated this entire thread. And Andre's post above proves he will not admit that the others are dishonest, just as I argued with 240.
You have posters on here that constantly like to bitch about fox's dishonest (andreisdaman, whork, etc), yet choose not to acknowledge the dishonest of their own primary news source.
-
What are you?...Iwantdick's defense attorney????????????????..is this is what my repeated destroyings of you have reduced you to??????????
I'm the one who just showed, using your own words, how you cannot keep up with your own twisted logic. You specifically called your juvenile post count dumb.
-
Thank you for pointing out that its kinda hard to lie about the hard news. To hear Andre tell it, Fox is outright lying, when in actuality it is hosts like hannity providing their opinion, not the actual news. Fox does it, MSNBC does it, so does CNN. They all have hosts of tv shows that offer their opinion. It would be nice if they were to be held to a factual standard, sadly none of them are, which had kinda been my point. I'm not naive or dishonest enough to claim fox to be exempt from it, I just also make the contention that the others practice in the same dishonesty. That is all i've ever stated this entire thread. And Andre's post above proves he will not admit that the others are dishonest, just as I argued with 240.
You have posters on here that constantly like to bitch about fox's dishonest (andreisdaman, whork, etc), yet choose not to acknowledge the dishonest of their own primary news source.
Yeah, if we apply the idea that mainstream news is more about entertainment, its easy to see why msnbc would hire a whore degenerate like Al Sharpton to appeal to a particular viewer demographic.
It is what it is, why is it so hard for some people to admit it? Why can we demonize one side when our side does the same shit? And then in same breath deny ours does it too?
We should just all say that the people they put on those 2 news outlets, MSNBC and FOX are full shit 60% of the time. nuff said lol.
-
I find it amusing that andreisdaman is debating me via 3rd party. he doesn't acknowledge my posts directly, but it's obvious he is reading all of them. He then waits for someone else to respond to me, and hitches a ride on their post. If his 2k posts rule and his DESTROYED comments weren't childish enough, this takes it to a new low for someone that talks about logic and critical thinking.
seems like he is probably the type person that puts someone's text messages on ignore on his phone but continues to send them texts 30 times a day. kinda feminine, but then again he does a lot of dick worship so who knows...
-
You said that is EXACTLY what they are claiming.
Then you spend 5 minutes giving us a detailed interpretation... explaining why you cannot just simply quote them. Then you attack me to end the post, trying to draw me into a debate.
We've been here for a decade on getbig. We see thru that. Post where they say "exactly" that, or don't. I have never seen them say CNN or MSNBC are 100% honest. never seen it.
Look a few posts down. Notice how he can't admit they lie, they make mistakes.
Thanks for playing, dumbass. It was a nice gesture to try and clean up whork's/andre's mess, but you failed.
-
Well....I rest my case...as I have said, some posters come here simply to cause anarchy....they will not acknowledge the truth no matter the evidence and will constantly bend the truth and lie about the statements that others have made.....again...this thread was about FOX NEWS not MSNBC or CNN....
as I've said I'm not going to get into a debate with lunatics...what I REALLY said is there for all to see.....no amount of lying or distorting can erase that....
-
I'm the one who just showed, using your own words, how you cannot keep up with your own twisted logic. You specifically called your juvenile post count dumb.
of course I did, oh great pontificator...and I stand by it....lunatics do not understand the language of diplomacy and logic......so I just use idiotic language to idiots..its like communicating with a baby through babytalk....nothing wrong with that
-
Well....I rest my case...as I have said, some posters come here simply to cause anarchy....they will not acknowledge the truth no matter the evidence and will constantly bend the truth and lie about the statements that others have made.....again...this thread was about FOX NEWS not MSNBC or CNN....
as I've said I'm not going to get into a debate with lunatics...what I REALLY said is there for all to see.....no amount of lying or distorting can erase that....
Yes, it is there for everyone to see. The best you could do was to state that the other networks make mistakes from time to time. That was your version of compromise to not look like a completely biased piece of shit, which you are.
And let's get one thing straight. We will even use one of your terms. You won't debate me because I've destroyed you every single time you have made an attempt.
Wrong again, it wasn't about fox news. The argument began between whork and me when he suggested fox lies more than the other networks, so that kinda makes it about them too.
-
poultry doo doo = well we were talking about this news source not that news source.
-
of course I did, oh great pontificator...and I stand by it....lunatics do not understand the language of diplomacy and logic......so I just use idiotic language to idiots..its like communicating with a baby through babytalk....nothing wrong with that
You stand by what? That your post count rule is stupid?
-
poultry doo doo = well we were talking about this news source not that news source.
For a guy that claims to have survived all the getbig political wars, andreisdaman seems kinda fragile. Furthermore, I was debating whork and he felt inclined to jump into this. It wasn't me that attacked andreisdaman, but I certainly delight in making him look stupid at every available oppurtunity
-
You stand by what? That your post count rule is stupid?
its the best way not to debate with idiotic lunatics.....whats said about me is fine..I've heard it all before...and it means absolutely NOTHING....but I'm not going to waste brain power on miscreants 8)
-
its the best way not to debate with idiotic lunatics.....whats said about me is fine..I've heard it all before...and it means absolutely NOTHING....but I'm not going to waste brain power on miscreants 8)
I wouldn't waste what little you have. You are working with a very small amount to begin with.
-
I wouldn't waste what little you have. You are working with a very small amount to begin with.
what the fuck is the matter with you?..can you please respect and adhere to my 2000 post rule please? 8)
-
what the fuck is the matter with you?..can you please respect and adhere to my 2000 post rule please? 8)
::)
This is really dumb. You sound like a little kid.
It is dumb
-
::)
It is dumb
8) ???
-
There could be several thousands of episodes on msnbc or cnn if he chose to target them too, but he is liberal so he targets fox. And plenty of his stuff can be proven false, but you would know that if you cared to do an ounce of research.
Great now prove it. Should be easy with so much stuff to choose from.
Your entire argument has unraveled and now hinges on 8 questions that all demographics answered almost the same, with not even a half question deviation between each group and confidence that a comedian was telling the truth, which he always wasn't
You dont need Stewarts Word or opinion this is not FOX news. Stewart backs up his claims with side-by-side video footage, interviews etc. A foreign concept to you but try to evolve.
It has taken you way too long and posting too much nonsense for you to say what i told you at the beginning of the thread. You have absolutely zero proof that fox is anymore dishonest than the other networks. You are just a jackass and a liar so you won't admit it because you've been made to look full retard
Next time you lack evidence and want to believe some thing anyhow, just say so.
You really have zero self-awareness. You are the one who want to believe FOX is credible so you discount all empirical evidence on the basis of it being liberal misinformation.
There is no point in making an ass of yourself an entire thread. You could have simply said that you are going to believe fox lies more, no matter the lack of evidence because you are an ignorant dishonest liberal,.and that would have been perfectly fine with me and I wouldn't have made you demonstrate you have zero.evidence.
There is a lot of evidence but you refuse to acknowledge it. You could have simply said that where going to believe FOX and its viewers were well informed no matter the evidence.
You are so stupid you actually thought there were multiple studies on this until I pointed it out to you that you were linking the same survey results multiple times. That alone make me question your reading comprehension. Now, you just swear the survey and a liberal comedian are all the evidence anyone would need.
That liberal comedian was the US most credible news anchor. You should watch his shows not take my for it. Gather the data then make an opinion. It can see its hard for a man who has been puppeteered for so long to grasp this simple principle but please try.
Sorry, that isn't good enough for any sane person. notice the only idiot that agrees with you is andreisdaman, and that is only because he hopes you have better luck with me than he has. Sorry to disappoint him, you are near as stupid as he is.
-
And msnbc, cnn, and the others steer the honest path. Msnbc employs al sharpton. Msnbc edited a 911 call to incite a racial response from the black community. You can't cite 1 example of fox doing anything that irresponsible. Yet I bet you still watch them. Gimme a break. You see what you want to see
Additionally, a person that voted black and defends black no matter what has no right to comment on objectivity. You citing critical thinking is laughable.. I've pretty much shown those to be nonexistent in your brain.
In you we're talking about the person that posts on a public message board and then says "i'm not talking to you", when someone makes you look like an idiot
So, in summary, you started your last post with "the fact is" and followed it with your own biased opinion and nothing that actually resembled a fact.
I dont get your reasoning. You whine about liberals but everytime you are exposed as having the very same traits that you despise in others, you use them as a scapegoat. You have a low standard for yourself but then again you should.
-
Yes, that is actually exactly what andre and whork are claiming. Have you not been following along?
Dont lie bitch. No one said this.
Even in the 8 question survey you refuse to acknowledge, msnbc scored horribly.
-
Yeah, if we apply the idea that mainstream news is more about entertainment, its easy to see why msnbc would hire a whore degenerate like Al Sharpton to appeal to a particular viewer demographic.
It is what it is, why is it so hard for some people to admit it? Why can we demonize one side when our side does the same shit? And then in same breath deny ours does it too?
We should just all say that the people they put on those 2 news outlets, MSNBC and FOX are full shit 60% of the time. nuff said lol.
Im on board with this.
-
Dont lie bitch. No one said this.
Even in the 8 question survey you refuse to acknowledge, msnbc scored horribly.
All these new posts to still demonstrate you have zero evidence to your original claim....
You really are a special kind of stupid
-
Im on board with this.
He isn't supporting you here. He is calling you out but you would know that if you were at all literate. His argument is similar to mine. People like you bitch about other news outlets while taking everything from the outlet of your own political party as the gospel. It's the same argument I've been making you look like a jackass on for 6 pages now.
-
I'm not going to waste my time on all the nonsense you posted, other than to say stop talking about empirical evidence. It's clearly a term that you have seen others use in a ln argument, and you thought it would make you look smart to include it yourself. You don't know what it means and it only aids in further making you look like an ass considering you've actually posted zero evidence at this point
Oh boy, john stewart the most credible news anchor. He isn't a news anchor at all. He hosts a satirical news comedy show on a comedy network that has no obligation to real journalism. When he has been called out, he just claims his show isn't real news, it's comedy.
-
He isn't supporting you here. He is calling you out but you would know that if you were at all literate. His argument is similar to mine. People like you bitch about other news outlets while taking everything from the outlet of your own political party as the gospel. It's the same argument I've been making you look like a jackass on for 6 pages now.
Learn to read fag. He said MSNBC and FOX where full of shit 60% of the time.
You watch FOX news so its actually you he is calling out.
-
I'm not going to waste my time on all the nonsense you posted, other than to say stop talking about empirical evidence. It's clearly a term that you have seen others use in a ln argument, and you thought it would make you look smart to include it yourself. You don't know what it means and it only aids in further making you look like an ass considering you've actually posted zero evidence at this point
Yes emperical evidence on one side your retarded opinion on the other. Only a moron like you would respond to real life data with an opinion for 6 pages. Nobody cares about your opinion. Are you an adolescent?
Oh boy, john stewart the most credible news anchor. He isn't a news anchor at all. He hosts a satirical news comedy show on a comedy network that has no obligation to real journalism. When he has been called out, he just claims his show isn't real news, it's comedy.
Jon Stewart has more credibility than all of FOX combined. His viewers are much more informed than FOX viewers (this is not hard FOX viewers are less informed than those that dont watch the news). This should really tell you something about your news source and really shows how simple minded you are. Oh and FOX is comedy as well, its just not intended comedy but you are unable to fathom this because you dont want your delutions destroyed.
-
Still no evidence, got it. You didn't have to resurrect this thread 2 weeks later to provide nothing yet again
You still don't understand how this works. You actually have to back up your claims or they are meaningless. You don't just get to say group x is more informed than y, with absolutely zero to back up your claim in terms of evidence.
-
Learn to read fag. He said MSNBC and FOX where full of shit 60% of the time.
You watch FOX news so its actually you he is calling out.
Yes, which is implying they both lie equally. Oh boy, are you a slow one....
-
Still no evidence, got it. You didn't have to resurrect this thread 2 weeks later to provide nothing yet again
No "evidence" will satisfy you sheep.
Anyone who brings any "evidence" on the table is automatically labeled as a liberal and the findings is therefore useless in your book.
You still don't understand how this works. You actually have to back up your claims or they are meaningless. You don't just get to say group x is more informed than y, with absolutely zero to back up your claim in terms of evidence.
This is very funny. I have supplied a survey which shows FOX viewers being the least informed demographic. I have also told you were you can watch thousands of examples of FOX news lying through their teeth. Yet we see no data from you to back up your claim only your retarded opinion. And still you make a post like this. You have zero self-awareness and the attention span of a house fly. You are just a sad fuck trying to hang on to his delution.
-
Yes, we know you provided a survey. Your illiteracy led you to believe you were providing multiple different links, until i pointed out they all use the same survey. Not only that, but you initially also stated the survey proved fox lies more. It doesn't. Even if we take it at face value, it is a survey pertaining to the knowledge of viewers, not fox's honesty.
Moreover, the vague survey shows a very small deviation, which we've already talked about, but i'm thinking you don't know what the word deviation means. The guy that put together the survey says people like you are using it in the wrong fashion and the difference is really trivial.
So, lets stop talking about anyone who brings evidence to the table. I'm asking you to bring evidence to the table, not anyone or everyone. You haven't done that and you can't do that. We've discussed this already and identified your stupidity already. You've attempted to amend your argument and you continue to be wrong every time.
I never said fox was the standard of truth telling. I said they lie no more so than the other networks. It was you that claimed they lie well more than the others, so the burden is on you to prove it.
-
You are talking out of your ass again.
Here is the data we have to work with:
A survey that says FOX is by far the least credible network and shows the FOX viewers as less informed than those who doesnt watch the news.
Thousands of episodes of the daily show where FOX is exposed as not just misinforming but deliberately lying to its audience.
Now instead of being a whiny little bitch why dont you show the data that support your claim?
-
You are talking out of your ass again.
Here is the data we have to work with:
A survey that says FOX is by far the least credible network and shows the FOX viewers as less informed than those who doesnt watch the news.
Thousands of episodes of the daily show where FOX is exposed as not just misinforming but deliberately lying to its audience.
Now instead of being a whiny little bitch why dont you show the data that support your claim?
The survey addresses the knowledge base of viewers, it doesn't even make a claim towards fox's credibility. I'm not really going to comment on 1000s of episodes of satirical comedy. That show has been proven wrong plenty of times, and when they are, they just say "hey we're comedy, not news".
What claim have I made exactly? Are you referring to me thinking that fox lies no more than the others? That was a counter to you claiming fox lies more, which you still have provided ZERO evidence to support your case.
I don't really know what to say about being a whiny bitch. I would wager everyone reading this feels that is the role you are filling quite well via your meltdown.
At least you are admitting you have no real data finally. You finally have owned up your sole piece of data being a survey. Falling apart at the seams....
-
The survey addresses the knowledge base of viewers, it doesn't even make a claim towards fox's credibility. I'm not really going to comment on 1000s of episodes of satirical comedy. That show has been proven wrong plenty of times, and when they are, they just say "hey we're comedy, not news".
Again different standards. FOX has been exposed many times, yet you still use them as a news source because you are a sheep at heart and thats not gonna change.
But please show me the many times Daily show has been wrong by providing links to your claims.
What claim have I made exactly? Are you referring to me thinking that fox lies no more than the others? That was a counter to you claiming fox lies more, which you still have provided ZERO evidence to support your case.
I don't really know what to say about being a whiny bitch. I would wager everyone reading this feels that is the role you are filling quite well via your meltdown.
If a was having a meltdown i would have tossed my laptop through the window i would not be writing with you. Are you projecting your feelings right now?
-
Who says fox is all I use? Your memory is as shitty as your reading comprehension. In this very thread, I've said I use them as 1 possible source. I also followed that up and said I never take anything they say as the truth until I've done more research.
You keep saying fox has been exposed many times and act as if I'm disagreeing with you. Ive agreed the entire thread that some of fox's personalities are dishonest. Where we differ, is that you claim them to be more dishonest than other networks and you also claimed to have proof to back that up. Yet, you have failed to provide that proof for over 6 threads now.
In 6 pages your evidence consists of a survey and mention of the daily show. That is literally all you have provided. For evidence to be so abundant, I would have expected more than that.
-
Who says fox is all I use? Your memory is as shitty as your reading comprehension. In this very thread, I've said I use them as 1 possible source. I also followed that up and said I never take anything they say as the truth until I've done more research.
Why dont you watch an independent news source instead?
You keep saying fox has been exposed many times and act as if I'm disagreeing with you.
You not only disagreed with me you also made the claim FOX was more honest than MSNBC and other networks. Now you have to back up that statement with data. I am waiting.
Ive agreed the entire thread that some of fox's personalities are dishonest. Where we differ, is that you claim them to be more dishonest than other networks and you also claimed to have proof to back that up. Yet, you have failed to provide that proof for over 6 threads now.
Yes i make the claim FOX is the most dishonest network followed by MSNBC. There is no scientific studies done on this that i am aware of so we have to go with the data at hand. The data supports my claim. Now its on you to provide data that support your claim. Provide data that shows FOX being less dishonest that MSNBC and other networks.
In 6 pages your evidence consists of a survey and mention of the daily show. That is literally all you have provided. For evidence to be so abundant, I would have expected more than that.
-
No such thing as an independent news source.
I made no such claim. I said fox was no more dishonest, possibly less.
You didn't provide data that told.us anything about fox's honesty. I know reading comprehension is an issue, but you provided results to a survey that tried to identify to the knowledge base of its viewers. It has absolutely zero to do with fox's honesty. How hard is that to understand. Once again, I will repeat this, the actual author behind the survey says it doesn't mean what you think it does. If you take.5 seconds to Google that, you will see he claims people like you tried using his survey out of political bias. He literally mentions exactly what you are doing right here as no way representing his survey results.
You've proven you are an idiot. You've made multiple attempts to.change the nature of your argument. It's not gonna work because you are wrong.
If you actually want to try and claim that you provided data in the future, you need to provide the list of survey questions and answers so we can see what we are working with. I provided the questions for you, but the answers seems to he not readily available. Funny how that works, isn't it. Those missing answers, that is what we refer to as data, that you keep insisting you've provided.
-
No such thing as an independent news source.
There are news sources that are as good as independent compared to MSNBC & FOX. Ever watched the news in Europe?
I made no such claim. I said fox was no more dishonest, possibly less.
Yes and you havent come up with any data. No back up your claim or STFU. Didnt they teach you to this in school?
You didn't provide data that told.us anything about fox's honesty. I know reading comprehension is an issue, but you provided results to a survey that tried to identify to the knowledge base of its viewers. It has absolutely zero to do with fox's honesty. How hard is that to understand. Once again, I will repeat this, the actual author behind the survey says it doesn't mean what you think it does. If you take.5 seconds to Google that, you will see he claims people like you tried using his survey out of political bias. He literally mentions exactly what you are doing right here as no way representing his survey results.
You've proven you are an idiot. You've made multiple attempts to.change the nature of your argument. It's not gonna work because you are wrong.
If you actually want to try and claim that you provided data in the future, you need to provide the list of survey questions and answers so we can see what we are working with. I provided the questions for you, but the answers seems to he not readily available. Funny how that works, isn't it. Those missing answers, that is what we refer to as data, that you keep insisting you've provided.
-
I'm glad you ignored the bottom part, seeing as you don't actually know what data is. You continue to confirm your stupidity
I don't have to come up with any data. You made a claim that fox lies more so than the other networks. It is your obligation to prove that. I made no such claim. I've said as much through the entire thread. You don't get to call someone a liar and demand that they prove they aren't the liar. No system works that way. Otherwise, we wouldn't have a Court system that requires evidence....
-
I'm glad you ignored the bottom part, seeing as you don't actually know what data is. You continue to confirm your stupidity
The data we have support my claim all the way through.
You refuse to believe it because it would further expose your ass as a misinformed sheep.
Now you post some data that support your claim.
-
The data we have support my claim all the way through.
You refuse to believe it because it would further expose your ass as a misinformed sheep.
Now you post some data that support your claim.
You haven't provided data. Data would be the answers collected. I don't recall you providing those
In addition, this is what now, the 3rd time that you've ignored the author of the survey stating that people like you are using his survey dishonestly, and lying for political gain
-
You haven't provided data. Data would be the answers collected. I don't recall you providing those
In addition, this is what now, the 3rd time that you've ignored the author of the survey stating that people like you are using his survey dishonestly, and lying for political gain
For the last time:
Some data is better than no data. The small amount of data support my claim. No data support your claim.
Did you watch some of the Daily Show episodes? ;)
-
For the last time:
Some data is better than no data. The small amount of data support my claim. No data support your claim.
Did you watch some of the Daily Show episodes? ;)
Absolutely not. What kind of idiot says some data is better than no data. Given the author of the survey is calling you a liar, we can see what is wrong with that statement. Some.data is provided by people like you in an attempt to be dishonest. There is a reason people.don't provide all the info, because it would also provide the whole context.
Let's look at how you said you had numerous examples showing that fox lies more. When pressed on the issue, you provided a few links. Upon reading these links, we see they all refer to 1 survey. The survey had nothing to do with fox honesty, but rather the knowledge base of viewers on current events. Upon looking at that survey, we see it was very limited and had to be administered a 2nd time as a result of its severe limitations. If we look further, the author of the survey says it doesn't mean anything as what you claim it does. In fact, he says the deviation is trivial and says people.like you are using it in a dishonest manner.
You've seemed pretty stupid this entire thread, but to somehow imply some data is good enough (which you still haven't provided) puts your intellect even further in the crapper.
I've watched the daily show plenty. He is funny guy with no journalistic responsibility. If he gets things wrong or is called it, he claims it was a joke and he isn't a journalist.
We are literally to the point that all the studies you claim to have that show fox to lie more are now completely reliant on episodes of the daily show. That's about what I expected at the beginning of this thread
-
Yes a survey that shows FOX viewers being uninformed is very much an indicator that FOX is not very credible. But we agree it at least show that FOX viewers is less informed than others. You are a perfect example of this.
And yes this survey + thousands of daily show episodes is a million times better than the retarded opinion from someone who watches FOX.
And dont even compare the times FOX has been wrong to Stewart. Fucking moron.
-
Yes a survey that shows FOX viewers being uninformed is very much an indicator that FOX is not very credible. But we agree it at least show that FOX viewers is less informed than others. You are a perfect example of this.
And yes this survey + thousands of daily show episodes is a million times better than the retarded opinion from someone who watches FOX.
And dont even compare the times FOX has been wrong to Stewart. Fucking moron.
No, the survey doesn't show anything you just said, the author has said as much but you keep ignoring that. The fact that you've ignored it multiple times tells me you are deliberately lying and not just ignorant to the subject
It's quite pathetic that your multiple studies now break down to episodes of the daily show as evidence
You can keep trying and I will keep making you look stupid. I'm still waiting for your database of studies
-
No, the survey doesn't show anything you just said, the author has said as much but you keep ignoring that. The fact that you've ignored it multiple times tells me you are deliberately lying and not just ignorant to the subject
This is fucking sad. You could have searched and posted data to support your claim and we could both have gotten smarter yet you just keep whining and refuse to back up anything. If the data is so bad find your own you lazy bum.
It's quite pathetic that your multiple studies now break down to episodes of the daily show as evidence.
No what is pathetic is that i made the effort of telling you where to find the evidence yet you just keep whining and refuse to look at it because you dont want your delutions destoyed.
You can keep trying and I will keep making you look stupid. I'm still waiting for your database of studies
You dont make anyone look stupid besides yourself but you do a good job at that no doubt. A database of studies on this matter doesnt exist but even if it did you would find a way to refuse to look at it. You could argue that a database on this exist in the form of Daily show episodes but you refuse to look at those instead you opted to give your stupid opinion for 6 pages. Stay ignorant.. fag.
-
Nothing you've provided has shown any data. You haven't provided any place to get data. You are so incompetent/illiterate that 1) you thought you were proving multiple studies 2) you actually didn't know how to interpret what you posted 3) you continue to lie about the nature of what you posted.
No one is supporting you here. It's clear at this point that you know you've completely lost the argument and you just want to get the last word. I won't let that happen. I will just keep making you look stupid over and over again.
Why do you continue to ignore and lie about the nature of the survey and what the author actually says about the survey.
Why are you so incompetent and idiotic that you consider a comedy a viable news source. Do you also consider anchorman a viable news source? It is the equivalent of the daily show and has fake anchorman in it?
Your data isn't only bad, it is nonexistent. Data would be the answers collected from the survey. The statistical breakdown is the interpretation of the results that were collected. You can't and won't provide the actual data. At this point I'm confident you don't even know what data is. Further, if you would stop with the lies and take ownership of your incompetence, the author of the study has said people like yourself are lying and being dishonest with his survey and it means absolutely zero of what you say. Why do you keep ignoring that point? I will keep bringing it up every time you bump this thread in a sad attempt to save face.
In case it isn't clear to you, you aren't winning here. You made a claim, modified that claim several times, and still fail to produce 1 shred of evidence.
And yet again, you made the claim that fox is more dishonest and evidence is available everywhere. It is your job to prove that, not my job to disprove it. In no place in the real world does 1 have to disprove the false claim of a random idiot
Oh boy, a data base doesn't exist, but even if it did.....Wow how the argument has changed. And no the daily show does not represent a database.
-
Nothing you've provided has shown any data. You haven't provided any place to get data.
Stop lying bitch. Thousands of Daily show episodes, a survey and everybody who grew up with a (somewhat) free press will tell you the same thing. The fact that you are an ignorant has no effect on the rest of the World only on your pitiful existence.
You are so incompetent/illiterate that 1) you thought you were proving multiple studies 2) you actually didn't know how to interpret what you posted 3) you continue to lie about the nature of what you posted.
No one is supporting you here. It's clear at this point that you know you've completely lost the argument and you just want to get the last word. I won't let that happen. I will just keep making you look stupid over and over again.
Why do you continue to ignore and lie about the nature of the survey and what the author actually says about the survey.
Why are you so incompetent and idiotic that you consider a comedy a viable news source.
Why are you so incompetent and idiotic that you consider a propaganda station a viable news source?
Do you also consider anchorman a viable news source? It is the equivalent of the daily show and has fake anchorman in it?
Your data isn't only bad, it is nonexistent. Data would be the answers collected from the survey. The statistical breakdown is the interpretation of the results that were collected. You can't and won't provide the actual data. At this point I'm confident you don't even know what data is. Further, if you would stop with the lies and take ownership of your incompetence, the author of the study has said people like yourself are lying and being dishonest with his survey and it means absolutely zero of what you say. Why do you keep ignoring that point? I will keep bringing it up every time you bump this thread in a sad attempt to save face.
In case it isn't clear to you, you aren't winning here. You made a claim, modified that claim several times, and still fail to produce 1 shred of evidence.
And yet again, you made the claim that fox is more dishonest and evidence is available everywhere. It is your job to prove that, not my job to disprove it. In no place in the real world does 1 have to disprove the false claim of a random idiot.
Its not my job to prove it to you you lazy bum. Its your point to research the point yourself and form an opinion on the matter. Unfortunately this matter is to close to your heart and actually researching it would expose you as an ignorant fool. You dont have the moral and mental fortitude to do this so you choose a life of denial instead.
Oh boy, a data base doesn't exist, but even if it did.....Wow how the argument has changed. And no the daily show does not represent a database.
There is thousands of episodes, data for everyone to look but you refuse to do it because you want to live in denial. You are a mental Coward.
-
Thank you for finally admitting you have no evidence to support your bullshit argument. I'm glad you have completely abandoned your original argument and now want me to investigate something that is a figment of your imagination. I don't really have any reason to do that....because I wasn't the one to claim to have massive amounts of proof that fox lies more than the other networks.
I'm glad you watch comedy central and derive all of your news from there. While you are confident in its accuracy, I will remain skeptical. Since that is where you derive all of your "facts", you should give south park a try. It's funnier the the daily show and less biased.
I think it's abundantly clear to everyone that has read your train wreck over the last 7 pages, you have no business in commenting on anyone's mental capacity or logic. You just cited "the opinion of anyone growing up with a free press" as data...