BajaNomad - Baja Nomads: A Possible Explanation

Baja Nomads: A Possible Explanation

motoged - 3-9-2015 at 10:28 PM

I seem to have come across a possible explanation for so many posts.....mine included.

Enjoy :saint:

http://www.wimp.com/smartnothing/

Robertofox - 3-10-2015 at 06:59 AM

Genius, simply genius!!! What more can one say? I love it!! (ok, lets not over do it).....

I have nothing to say............!

fixtrauma - 3-10-2015 at 08:50 AM

Link to text?

AKgringo - 3-10-2015 at 09:00 AM

I had trouble following the narrative, is there a link to a text of this important message?

I guess you could say, I got nothing out of it!

[Edited on 3-10-2015 by AKgringo]

wilderone - 3-10-2015 at 09:23 AM

Wow - if you wanted to sell snowballs to Eskimos, you could use the video as a teaching model for snowball salesmen.

motoged - 3-10-2015 at 09:52 AM

Quote: Originally posted by AKgringo

I had trouble following the narrative, is there a link to a text of this important message?

I guess you could say, I got nothing out of it!

[Edited on 3-10-2015 by AKgringo]

Not even a smile?

You got me Ged (or is it Moto?)

AKgringo - 3-10-2015 at 10:36 AM

Yeah, I not only smiled, but chuckled a bit too! You wonder why with guys like that out there, used car dealers still think they should star in their own commercials?

Sweetwater - 3-10-2015 at 10:44 AM

Quote: Originally posted by motoged

I seem to have come across a possible explanation for so many posts.....mine included.

Enjoy :saint:

http://www.wimp.com/smartnothing/

Hmmmmm.....that started in 1984.....wonder if there's a coincidence with the book....1984........

Quote:

Nineteen Eighty-Four, sometimes published as 1984, is a dystopian novel by English author George Orwell published in 1949.[1][2] The novel is set in Airstrip One (formerly known as Great Britain), a province of the superstate Oceania in a world of perpetual war, omnipresent government surveillance and public manipulation, dictated by a political system euphemistically named English Socialism (or Ingsoc in the government's invented language, Newspeak) under the control of a privileged Inner Party elite, that persecutes individualism and independent thinking as "thoughtcrimes".[3]

DianaT - 3-10-2015 at 11:59 AM

Quote: Originally posted by motoged

I seem to have come across a possible explanation for so many posts.....mine included.

Enjoy :saint:

http://www.wimp.com/smartnothing/

I LOVED it. Thank you! :lol:

vgabndo - 3-10-2015 at 12:05 PM

I distinctly remember, in a heated conversation with a group of friends, when I first moved to San Diego, almost shouting: "1984 is a LOT closer then 14 years away".. It wouldn't surprise me if, as some conspiracy theorists claim, that the little camera in my lap top can be turned on without my knowledge for an NSA look at my life. And remember...multiple surveys tell us that FOX really is the most trusted freaking name in news in the US of A. That said, I am feeling a lot less stressed since I gave up all hope for my country.

motoged - 3-10-2015 at 12:43 PM

Perry,
Don't give up ALL hope......yet :biggrin:

As for the laptop cam.....maybe they are watching and listening....so put tape over the lens when "researching" your 53rd shade of grey :biggrin:

Pompano - 3-10-2015 at 12:50 PM

Yes, Hang in there, Perry, there's always hope!

Here's an interesting exercise on what we like to see on our Baja tv sets at the US news hour.

I often wonder why Nomads get so riled up by this subject? How about some 'facts' showing which news agency is the best...as in... least biased and with no obvious agenda...and why? Can you be subjective? Or is this impossible in today's divided tv audiences?

CNN
FOX
ABC
CBS
MSNBC
OTHER?

It's all fun...and it's good to be prepared..

[Edited on 3-10-2015 by Pompano]

vgabndo - 3-10-2015 at 04:49 PM

No Pampano, it really isn't about which talking head on which network is telling the most lies on the boob tube. Although I admit that the disgusting Megyn Kelly on FOX can can send me into a homicidal rage with just one of her condescending facial expressions. To me it is more about what has happened to the country. We have allowed a tiny minority of our people to own the vast majority of the country's wealth. We have allowed them to control our elections with their money. Our economic system is on the brink of collapse being supported by foreign loans and private banks printing more dollars. By poisoning our water supply we've managed to temporarily stave off the consequences of running out of oil. The vast majority of the nuclear waste we've generated is still in temporary containment because we still haven't figured out a safe way to deal with it. Our educational attainment, compared to most civilized nations is humiliating. We have the most expensive health care on the planet because it is not a human right but still tied to the profit motive. We have more people locked up in prison, per capita, than any nation in the world, and now we have a 'for-profit' commercial prison industry. There are approximately 90 guns in private ownership for every 100 Americans. These weapons are concentrated in one end of the political spectrum. There are at least 1200 paramilitary militias recognized by the FBI. The clock is ticking...

And, in a few weeks the vast majority of these Americans are going to boil chicken eggs, hide them in the yard, and tell their hapless children that rabbits laid them, then they are going to get all dressed up and make the annual trek to a temple some place where they will look each other in the eye and claim to believe that in the iron age a guy who had been dead for three days, crawled out of his tomb, flew off into the sky, and he has been waiting there for just the right moment to come back down and kill everybody. One nation under God. Where rationality bats last.

Pompano - 3-10-2015 at 05:50 PM

Perry, you raise a lot of questions from a certain point of view, but my question was about why one news organization is so often vilified as opposed to others?

David K - 3-10-2015 at 06:04 PM

Because one network DARES to provide the 'other side' of the slanted stories... and many fear too much information may actually create intelligent voters!

alacran - 3-10-2015 at 06:10 PM

Because, they opted NOT, to fall for the sad state that the US is in by not following the the game of the race card.

motoged - 3-10-2015 at 08:01 PM

Quote: Originally posted by David K

Your cartoon says it all... only Fox isn't in bed with Obama.

Sure enough....because it is so busy schtupping guys like you, DK :lol:

vgabndo - 3-10-2015 at 08:06 PM

For openers, Pompano, Rupert Murdoch obviously has a conservative agenda and has made sure that his media empire uses the most sophisticated propaganda techniques to push his views. Surely no one is willing to claim that FOX news is liberal or middle of the road. As a result their FAIR AND BALANCED logo is an insult to anyone who understands anything about legitimate journalism. When Ronald Reagan was able to get rid of the fairness doctrine, it opened the door for "news organizations" to lie without fear of FCC sanction. The documentary "OutFOXed" offered the public a pretty startling look at the cynical nature of FOX news balance.

It is hard to find a "newscast" on FOX. The day is full of repeated personal opinion programs with the likes of Hannity, O'Reilly, Sara Palin, Anne Coulter, Oliver North, Megyn Kelly and a host of other people whose obvious disrespect and revulsion of anyone who doesn't think just like them clearly separates them from legitimate journalism.

Watching their election coverage and hearing the number of times, in their excitement, they say for instance WE are winning in Florida, when they mean the Republican candidate has a lead there, is just a clue to their brand of unbalanced coverage. (Murdoch has been a large campaign contributor to the GOP)

They pounded WMD's into stupid people's heads to the point that millions of their viewers still believe they existed. They did the same thing trying to undercut the President with their "birther" nonsense. They turned an unfortunate minor loss of life in Benghazi into a treasonable offense and harped on it for months.

John Stewart and his team of writer/researchers have made a career out of calling them on their lies day after day, week after week, year after year.

I think they get picked-on because they don't even TRY to act like journalists. They are far to busy using cynical techniques to inflame their tea party Christian Republican viewing base. That's my opinion.

[Edited on 3-12-2015 by vgabndo]

Pompano - 3-11-2015 at 12:28 PM

Thanks for the reply, vgabndo. Forgive the late reply, but I've been after some steelhead and they take precedence to my response. Suffice to say, we have dinner and also some successful releases.

Plus...the new software on the forum has made me re-write this about a dozen times!! Grrrr...I'm beginning to hate commas, dashes, quote marks, and that stupid squiggly thing...

As you might surmise, I'm a history buff, appreciate and use humor, and am addicted to good news programs.

My main thought on this....Why so much avid hatred for FOX NEWS by liberals?

Seems a little over the top to me?...and so this is a subject that has always fascinated me for a couple of different reasons...these extreme liberal attacks on BajaNomads towards FOX news. Some are forever posting degrading remarks about FOX/FAUX. I find it kind of funny.

The news media in America is the most entertaining reality show on the air. But the extreme hatred and vicious attacks by hard-core liberals on FOX News are examples that I find most amusing of all. But amusing or not, sometimes one has to wonder why? I have some theories about it and will tell you my reasons about why they have this reaction.

I will start off by saying that, in my opinion, all news media is biased one way or another...and any news watcher expecting unbiased news is naive. Pure unbiased news would be like watching the plain facts coming over a stock market ticker-tape machine and would be boring as hell. Nobody would like that...pure and simple. People seek out the sort of biased news they are most comfortable with and want to accept. We all choose our news outlets through this bias, just as we choose our careers, friends and the kind of fishing we like best.

So, with that premise, neoconservatives of all types are attracted to FOX. It's more agreeable to them than what they see on other networks. Liberals go to MSNBC and such for the same reasons. However, for me it's interesting to see how conservatives and liberals each react to the chosen news source of the other.

Now, my reasons for liberals hating FOX News so much more than conservatives hating the liberal news networks.

First, FOX broke the monopoly. Like it or not, until they came on the scene all the networks had a left-wing or liberal bias. When FOX started, they made a point of having a conservative and a liberal point of view where possible. Naturally, FOX slanted itself towards the conservative side of things. They became popular because the liberal left had dominated the news for so long without being challenged. Their bias had become exposed and freedom-minded America did not like it . They turned to FOX not because they provided an unbiased view , but because at least now they had a choice.

Second, FOX News shattered the liberals echo chamber. The liberals were so used to having their bias accepted and not challenged, that now they were put into a position of having to defend their beliefs/propaganda. Some were not so good at that...I know one personally...and some of their beliefs were indefensible. So, FOX News presented just the opposite of libs like Bill Maher's old and sometimes current show. If you remember, his formula was to invite 3 or 4 liberals on and 1 conservative and then all would take turns bashing the solo conservative. Actual facts were never the issue...it was all about ruining the dumb conservative who will never make any headway. FOX did just the opposite, and liberals hated being on the recieving end. FOX News changed that relationship on the national level and became very popular with the American public. They could now find that a whole lot of folks would support them in their views and of course became less afraid to challenge the left wing. Along with this, liberals who were so used to the self-assured confidence that came from never having to actually justify the spin they preached, had their world shattered.

Third,(and you should like this one, vgabndo..because it involves Megan Kelly, that rather good-looking newswoman you so vehemently degrade?)

FOX News put hot women on the air..wait! let me yell out a affirming YAA-HOO! Hah..remember back in college when it was assumed that all the really hot chicks were liberals? That was a hoot...let me tell you it was a hard job convincing a real Foxy-lib that I was not a hard-core Christian in disguise and against pre-marital sex..

FOX News put good-looking women on the air who challenged the liberal view of conservative women...meaning 'hags' that couldn't have any more kids and were obsessed with stopping abortion. Well, all these females were no different in thier collective vacuity than from any other talking heads on other networks. But, they are almost always better looking. Perfect tool for gaining more viewership, right? Putting all the personality and political views aside, on a purely visual basis, Megan Kelly, Laura Ingraham, Anne Coulter, Julie Banderas, Andrea Tanteros, Juliet Huddy, etc..they're all primo Foxes. Some may get a bit long in the tooth, no doubt, but for pure eye candy, they're all winners. It was a good ploy and men all over America loved it. I know I did....and it meant I could find women to listen to who were not raging liberal femiN-zi types.

Hmmm...I wonder if Megan would accept an invite to go on a cruise to discuss all this?

So, in the end, I just think that liberals have to just get over it. FOX News is no more or less biased than the hype you watch, no less or more reliable, and no more or less right in their analysis programs. A significant portion of the American public disagrees with you, and does not think California and New York should dictate to the rest of the country on how to run their lives and do business. Remember when liberals began hitting the roof over when talk radio came around? I didn't even know about it until I heard all the complaining...had to search around AM for God's sake..who would have thought you could find anything there except static and baseball?

Adding to this, I really don't know why liberals should ever complain about media bias. They control almost every media outlet on the planet. They have most networks in their pocket..CNN, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, NBC...who am I leaving out?...the near entire academic world, tons of big papers (Times, San Francisco Chronicle, etc, etc) and almost all analysis programs. Heck, they even have a comedy show...which, sadly, many seem to think is the real news.

Conservatives have FOX News, The Wall Street Journal, and AM radio. That is hardly a media coupe and liberals should just get over that fact.

And if liberals are so tolerant and non-judgmental, I have to wonder at the viciousness of their attacks on people for doing just what they have been able to do for so many years...which is to pick their own most agreeable form of bias to listen to and with which to affirm and bond.

There is not much difference between Piers Morgan and Bill O'Reilly..except for their ratings!

Ah yes, those ratings! That might be the 'real' reason liberals hate FOX News.

It's plain that many more Americans watch FOX and think liberals are wrong, and that public is willing to say so out loud and in the open now. An ever present reminder that FOX represents a conservative interest in the world that liberals can no longer shout down or intimadate. That got to chap their burros quite a bit.

I could give you 40-50 honest examples of how the Liberal media is biased, but this is long enough as it is. Like someone once said, I don't have the talent to make it any shorter.

And so that's my opinion also, but I've tried to be as 'fair and balanced' as I can..and without being unkind and calling names.
I've always believed in the old adage that 'Rudeness is a weak man's show of strength."

Hope your day goes extremely well.

Sweetwater - 3-11-2015 at 12:50 PM

Roger,
One of my sons is a Creative Writer at the Masters level. He has steered me to a number of analysis of how people across the globe get their "news" and how valid that news content can be. Some people put their values ahead of actual facts and that has been the biggest documented issue with the FOX brand of news. There is much more opinion stated within any of their programs than there is actual news content. Huge analysis here: http://www.stateofthemedia.org/2005/overview/

Bottom line of FOX content analysis: The Project on Excellence in Journalism report in 2006 showed that 68 percent of Fox cable stories contained personal opinions, as compared to MSNBC at 27 percent and CNN at 4 percent. The "content analysis" portion of their 2005 report also concluded that "Fox was measurably more one-sided than the other networks, and Fox journalists were more opinionated on the air."

These figures which are tabulated and verified through that very long and exhaustive research are in direct conflict with what FOX presents and would have people actually believe. By the measurements of objective journalism, they are the least accurate and most biased source that the public is exposed to. Oh well, hope it doesn't ruin anyones day or come as a big surprise to the uninformed......

Barry A. - 3-11-2015 at 01:13 PM

I did not need a "study" to tell me that, Sweetwater------------and FNC never claimed to be un-biased!!! They constantly say they have a "conservative" bent. They do have a lot of "opinion programs", but they DO try hard to present both sides of the issues in a "fair and balanced" way, from my viewpoint.

And, as far as I can tell, they have NEVER lied-----mistakes yes, and they ALWAYS point them out when they make them which is not often.

But, like Pomp says, they are so easy to watch and listen too, and I get a LOT of entertainment out of watching their commentators.

Am I biased?----- of course I am, but so be it. LOL I listen to MSNBC, too, but it is often hard to do as they are so boring to me and say the darn'est things.

I like NPR / PBS for more better balance on things.

I think that Roger nailed it in his comments.

Barry

Pompano - 3-11-2015 at 01:14 PM

Sweetwater, we will agree to disagree. It's all about opinion, anyway.

Here's some of the same as you have shown...also from a journalistic source. Examples of a liberal media bias, but I think you already know they existed.

http://www.westernjournalism.com/top-50-examples-liberal-med...

Be thankful we can still debate in a friendly way ...at least for awhile. I once lived for a year in a country where certain debates and news were not allowed, and was punishable by death. Bandershah, Iran in the '60's.

As for FOX News and all the other networks, I think some folks are confused as to what is a 'commentary' segment as opposed to straight news reporting. Think about it.

edit to add...I'm not going to respond to any snarky remarks on this subject. I'd much rather spend the time with steelheads...or a banana cream pie made by Megan Kelly.

[Edited on 3-11-2015 by Pompano]

elgatoloco - 3-11-2015 at 01:27 PM

Bill O'Reilly. :lol:

motoged - 3-11-2015 at 01:53 PM

Quote: Originally posted by Pompano

..... banana cream pie made by Megan Kelly.

[Edited on 3-11-2015 by Pompano]

Roger,
As we have seen a realm of your co-pilots, I an assuming that is a "code phrase" for an activity....done liberally

P.S. Not meant to be snarky... :saint:

[Edited on 3-11-2015 by motoged]

Pompano - 3-11-2015 at 02:01 PM

Quote: Originally posted by motoged

Quote: Originally posted by Pompano

..... banana cream pie made by Megan Kelly.

[Edited on 3-11-2015 by Pompano]

Roger,
As we have seen a realm of your co-pilots, I an assuming that is a "code phrase" for an activity....done liberally

Ged, you are most assuredly correct...I will gladly take 'liberal' amounts of said Megan. Plus I am told she is a terrific cook.

Ah perfection...and in Baja, too..

Do you think we've hijacked this thread enough?

[Edited on 3-11-2015 by Pompano]

Alm - 3-11-2015 at 08:39 PM

Quote: Originally posted by motoged

I seem to have come across a possible explanation for so many posts.....mine included.

Enjoy :saint:

http://www.wimp.com/smartnothing/

This, and cheap tequila. Plus, plenty of spare time.

DebMer - 3-12-2015 at 06:55 AM

Different talking heads, same source of propaganda: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VC9Wqgt0hhg

Barry A. - 3-12-2015 at 08:27 AM

Quote: Originally posted by DebMer

Different talking heads, same source of propaganda: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VC9Wqgt0hhg

There are a VERY limited source (like AP, UPI, etc.) of general National and International news, and all news desks subscribe to them. To call it "propaganda" is a stretch, and misleading I believe.

Barry

David K - 3-12-2015 at 09:53 AM

Thank you Roger for posting, it is what we all know to be true, and why FNC is far and away the #1 choice to hear both viewpoints and the hard stories the other networks bury.

mtgoat666 - 3-12-2015 at 10:18 AM

Quote: Originally posted by David K

Thank you Roger for posting, it is what we all know to be true, and why FNC is far and away the #1 choice to hear both viewpoints and the hard stories the other networks bury.

dk, sometimes you are pretty funny! :lol:

durrelllrobert - 3-12-2015 at 11:13 AM

He that can control the media shall be more successful in ruling the earth than he that is controlled by big business. (sorry, no link for that staement

toneart - 3-12-2015 at 12:46 PM

I rarely chime in on political discussions here on BN. For one thing, as soon as I do it gets shuffled off to Off Topic and that is the kiss of death for any objectivity, given the (scant) population of that dank, dark cellar. In fact, the body of the main board doesn't go there to read anything.

So, while it is still here on the main board, I will try to contribute my opinion. First of all, I want to commend everyone who has posted here for presenting their opinions without rancor. The posters are giving their opinions, predictably, from their political points of view. It is really amazing how one person can see a subject so totally opposite from another. It is as though they were looking at two different stories. But that is the nature of our divided country. No, let me walk that back a bit; here we have the best examples of how those points of view should be presented. The real nature of our divided country contains much more anger and angst.

Here is my opinion on this thread: The Ted video is really funny and the poster's point is well taken in relation to The BajaNomad...blah blah blah.

I used to sit down for hours with Roger (Pompano) in Mulege and discuss politics, fishing and many other topics. We never did agree on politics. That is not an indictment of Roger's politics! It just shows that real gentlemen, raised in the right way, (you too, Barry), can carry on a conversation from their very different perspectives and yet remain civil. Furthermore, most here are quite eloquent in their writing skills and they are able to present their points of view so that we all can understand where they stand, and why.

Regarding Journalism, most of us are old enough to remember when that was an honorable profession across the board. Investigative Journalists are among the smartest, highly educated and experienced observers of what is really happening in the world. They go to where the news is happening. They dig out the truth, however that may fall, ideologically, and report their findings.

There is a code of ethics which still exist, but is too often violated these days, and that is to seek the truth in what they are investigating and reporting. But as I said before, the truth is so different, depending on one's ideology. Being Liberal, I can honestly tell you that I cannot see the truth in much of what Fox presents. They exist to present the Conservative points of view. Everyone knows this and this has been stated in this string by both Conservatives and Liberals.

Roger pointed out the differences between opinion talk shows and news reporting. On one hand you have Hannity and O'reilly. On the other, you have Shepard Smith, a news anchor. Hannity and O'reilly show obvious biases as opposed to Smith. And that is the way it should be. The main hypocrisy Hannity, O'reilly and the bevy of babes claim, is that they are telling the truth. They don't need to do that. Their shows stand on their own as entertainment, and they are highly successful. I suppose their lying, (Yes, I said lying), is so preposterous, that that adds to their success. That is the way it is designed in the Rupert Murdock, Roger Ailes Fox empire.

This is all good entertainment! Good for a good laugh! Just don't take them seriously, but that is hard for some to do. Those who believe them are duped by the faux news. They developed their biases by looking no further for their information. They are far less inquisitive than their Liberal counterparts. And that, my friends, is the whole purpose for Fox "News's" existence. It is by design. It is brilliant and it works as designed!

If your are curious, you will go to the various Fact Check sources to get the truth. Compare everything Hannity and O'reilly says against what Rachael Maddow says. She is so principled! Obviously hers is also an entertainment/opinion show, full of bias. But she rarely reports stories that can't be fully verified. On the rare occasions where she does make a mistake, she will admit it and correct it in a later show.

My last word in this post is to not vote for anyone who advocates violence anywhere in the world. And that goes for both political parties. They are both heading us down the road towards the end war.

motoged - 3-12-2015 at 12:56 PM

Tony,
Thanks for that....

An American friend living in Baja has recently (past year) been exposed to Canadian tv news as he has been caretaking a place w/ satelite TV....and he continues to comment on the difference that CBC, for instance, offers as professional reporting compared to USA networks....

One observation was that the Canadian newscaster seem to be real people, and not performers as much as the USA networks.

I think it would be interesting to see how other "Americans" perceive news casting and reporting away from the fetid styles of reporting coming out of the alleged "us / them" US programs....BBC, CBC, and I am sure there are others....

If you live in a small box, the air becomes stale.... :light:

toneart - 3-12-2015 at 02:29 PM

"If you live in a small box, the air becomes stale.... :light:

Thanks for that, Motoged. How true! And thanks for your validation.
I hope others will keep this going. :yes:

motoged - 3-12-2015 at 02:32 PM

Yes, we all need to breathe "in" once and a while while expelling our thoughts....

Keeping "it" going ...

mtgoat666 - 3-12-2015 at 02:35 PM

Quote: Originally posted by motoged

Tony,
Thanks for that....

An American friend living in Baja has recently (past year) been exposed to Canadian tv news as he has been caretaking a place w/ satelite TV....and he continues to comment on the difference that CBC, for instance, offers as professional reporting compared to USA networks....

One observation was that the Canadian newscaster seem to be real people, and not performers as much as the USA networks.

I think it would be interesting to see how other "Americans" perceive news casting and reporting away from the fetid styles of reporting coming out of the alleged "us / them" US programs....BBC, CBC, and I am sure there are others....

If you live in a small box, the air becomes stale.... :light:

yes, CBC is great. But we have the USA equivalent: PBS/NPR. CBC is public broadcasting canadian style.

motoged - 3-12-2015 at 02:53 PM

Quote: Originally posted by mtgoat666

[

yes, CBC is great. But we have the USA equivalent: PBS/NPR. CBC is public broadcasting canadian style.

See, Perry.....there IS hope.....

toneart - 3-12-2015 at 03:02 PM

Quote: Originally posted by mtgoat666

Quote: Originally posted by motoged

yes, CBC is great. But we have the USA equivalent: PBS/NPR. CBC is public broadcasting canadian style.

Yes! I agree. Very interesting that Barry also cited PBS/NPR as reliable news sources. How he can come to his conclusions just astounds me, but he and I have had that discussion many times. He may defy my stereotypical characterization of Conservatives living in a small box. ...Different worlds indeed! :?:

At least he can wander out of the Wall Street Journal (Murdock), Fox (News ?) CNBC and find his way back home.

Barry A. - 3-12-2015 at 04:01 PM

Quote: Originally posted by toneart

Quote: Originally posted by mtgoat666

Quote: Originally posted by motoged

yes, CBC is great. But we have the USA equivalent: PBS/NPR. CBC is public broadcasting canadian style.

At least he can wander out of the Wall Street Journal (Murdock), Fox (News ?) CNBC and find his way back home.

Tony (etc.) I do listen to NPR daily, and watch the TV news on PBS, as well as FNC, FBN, and occasionally CNN and even MSNBC. I "come to the conclusions" that I come too because the existing system and Republican ideals has worked so incredibly well for me and mine that I am very skeptical when I hear left-leaning pundits say or infer that it is broken, or needs changing. Also, I am a strict Fiscal Conservative, a Constitutionalist, and was raised in a very Conservative Republican Family, and that serves as a filter for EVERYTHING I hear and read.

I am equally astounded as you when I hear the ideas of the left, as well as the many complaints they constantly are voicing, and wonder how in the world they can come to their conclusions------and I say that very seriously, and not being sarcastic.

Barry

toneart - 3-12-2015 at 04:57 PM

You are very clear, Barry. Thank you!

J.P. - 3-12-2015 at 08:03 PM

Quote: Originally posted by David K

Because one network DARES to provide the 'other side' of the slanted stories... and many fear too much information may actually create intelligent voters!

There's no danger of you becoming one. :lol:

Skipjack Joe - 3-12-2015 at 08:42 PM

Quote: Originally posted by Barry A.

Another words ... You're close minded.

vgabndo - 3-12-2015 at 09:13 PM

Quote: Originally posted by Skipjack Joe

Quote: Originally posted by Barry A.

Another words ... You're close minded.

Yep, the system you so appreciate has worked exceedingly well...for a tiny little percentage of our population. The proof that the system needs to be fixed is that it has cost the American people most of their middle class and thrown more people into poverty than any time since the great depression. The huge divide between the few 'haves' and the many 'have nots' has left America a lot closer to collapse and civil unrest than a lot of millionaires are willing to admit.

Skipjack Joe - 3-12-2015 at 09:18 PM

Quote: Originally posted by Pompano

I will start off by saying that, in my opinion, all news media is biased one way or another...and any news watcher expecting unbiased news is naive. Pure unbiased news would be like watching the plain facts coming over a stock market ticker-tape machine and would be boring as hell.

There are two features about newcasting that introduces falsehood -

1) selective news reporting
2) news reporting as entertainment

Selective news reporting has existed forever and exists in all nations. News reporting as entertainment is more recent and isn't news reporting at all. Yes, facts are dull but quality news stations present them, rather than interpret them.

But I want to talk about how I became more aware of selective news reporting.

It occurred during the bombing of Serbia by the western countries. At that time CNN provided most of the coverage and I believe Clinton even stated that if he wanted to know what occurred there he could simply turn on CNN. Virtually all of the coverage consisted of CNN reporters interviewing Kosovar refugees at the Albanian border. This was probably due to the fact that they weren't allowed to enter the country. This went on day after day, week after week.

There were other film segments, such as the damage cluster bombs were doing to the civilian population, or the accidental bombing of the chinese embassy, or the target bombing that hit that train crossing the bridge with civilian passengers. But these were usually short segments that you had to wait until after midnight to see.

As you probably remember about 55% of Americans support this war and about 92% of Russians were against it.

The eye opener for me was when on the air a CNN reporter from the studio asked the CNN reporter in Moscow how could they possibly not support this war. Couldn't they see the facts?

The answer - .

The Russian news programs were showing round the clock the bombing of the civilians and gave brief mention of the Kosovars that were leaving the country. They were providing the total opposite coverage that western media was providing. So that's how public opinion about the war was formed in the two countries. Selective reporting. Each one claimed to be unbiased and each one reported just the facts. But each one 'promoted' some information over the other.

That kind of reporting has been going on forever and continues today. The people of China, India, Japan, and Russia each get different information provided for them.

In my opinion, if you want to get news about a country go to the media of that country.

Barry A. - 3-12-2015 at 10:12 PM

Quote: Originally posted by Skipjack Joe

Quote: Originally posted by Barry A.

Another words ... You're close minded.

If I am, Skipjack, then I suspect that most everybody is!!!

Barry

Skipjack Joe - 3-13-2015 at 05:36 AM

There was an old joke in Soviet times about the news they read.

A footrace was run between Khrushchev and Kennedy. Afterwards the headlines from Pravda read:

"Our premier comes in 2nd and the American president arrives next to last."

----

and that, in a nutshell, is how every country gets it's news.

SFandH - 3-13-2015 at 06:44 AM

Quote: Originally posted by Skipjack Joe

There was an old joke in Soviet times about the news they read.

A footrace was run between Khrushchev and Kennedy. Afterwards the headlines from Pravda read:

"Our premier comes in 2nd and the American president arrives next to last."

----

and that, in a nutshell, is how every country gets it's news.

Good one! So true. Spin :spingrin:

I've recently added this channel to my news sources. Interesting reports.

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCZaT_X_mc0BI-djXOlfhqWQ

VICE News is an international news channel created by and for a connected generation. Our documentaries and original news series bring you an unvarnished look at some of the most important events of our time.

[Edited on 3-13-2015 by SFandH]

Pompano - 3-13-2015 at 10:19 AM

I have another Russian saying for you, Igor...

"Man exploits man. Under communism, it's just the opposite."

Skipjack Joe - 3-13-2015 at 11:14 AM

Quote: Originally posted by Pompano

I have another Russian saying for you, Igor...

"Man exploits man. Under communism, it's just the opposite."

Hah. I like it.

Bajahowodd - 3-14-2015 at 04:51 PM

Quote: Originally posted by David K

Your cartoon says it all... only Fox isn't in bed with Obama.

Only because they are owned and bought as a propaganda outlet for the Republican party. I am growing weary of this. The demographic of Fox watchers is over 65 and white and male. They will dwindle.

Bajahowodd - 3-14-2015 at 04:54 PM

Quote: Originally posted by David K

Thank you Roger for posting, it is what we all know to be true, and why FNC is far and away the #1 choice to hear both viewpoints and the hard stories the other networks bury.

BS!

David K - 3-14-2015 at 05:35 PM

Facts are not BS... Do you really bow to the altar of big government and hand over your life to big brother so easily?

Why does the Left fear Fox News and Talk Radio, if they have such better methods for government? People are not stupid, as much as you would hope. How much longer can we go on with the few providing for the many?

I trust people, and not some bureaucrat 3,000 miles away to spend the money they earn how they see fit for their family.

Bajahowodd - 3-15-2015 at 05:07 PM

I really feel sorry for you if you really believe that Fox News is telling the truth about anything.

David K - 3-15-2015 at 05:14 PM

The same to you if you fall for CNN, ABC, NBC, CBS, MSNBC, etc.

At least Fox gives the news in a way that requires one to think instead of just feeding you the DNC approved lines... or lies.

toneart - 3-15-2015 at 06:30 PM

Quote: Originally posted by David K

The same to you if you fall for CNN, ABC, NBC, CBS, MSNBC, etc.

At least Fox gives the news in a way that requires one to think instead of just feeding you the DNC approved lines... or lies.

bajabuddha - 3-15-2015 at 08:42 PM

DAVID K. AND BARRY A. 2016 !

STFU and throw your hats in the ring. Put up or..........

Barry A. - 3-15-2015 at 09:14 PM

Quote: Originally posted by bajabuddha

DAVID K. AND BARRY A. 2016 !

STFU and throw your hats in the ring. Put up or..........

Right now I am rooting for John Kasich, Governor of Ohio.

Barry

Cisco - 3-15-2015 at 09:41 PM

Quote: Originally posted by David K

The same to you if you fall for CNN, ABC, NBC, CBS, MSNBC, etc.

At least Fox gives the news in a way that requires one to think instead of just feeding you the DNC approved lines... or lies.

Oh David. Please check this out. I think there's a movie also. My machine doesn't do movies so you're on your own.

'Didn't know they watch Fox in Russia': Defiant 'kill Russians ' US ex-general insists he told 'truth'

http://rt.com/usa/240829-kill-russians-fox-general-defiant/

Hmm. An ex U.S. General didn't know they watch Fox in Russia???

Not even Jesus can save US now.

Cisco - 3-15-2015 at 10:01 PM

Might try:

http://www.opednews.com/articles/Thou-Art-the-Man-A-Messag-b...

and:

http://www.opednews.com/articles/CNN-Is-Beating-the-Drums-o-...
Wolf Blitzer and the end of the world.