"josephus" <dogbird@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:sXkQd.957$IU.24@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net...

[snip]

I do want to point out that you are seriously out of kilter, if you
cannot trust any established survey as being too liberal. There is a
real consideration that you are faking and lying that you have an
"unbiased survey".

There is a real consideration that you are a pederast, as well, while we're
doing personal remarks.

This, according to the statements above , shows a
clear disregard for reliability and credibility. Before one can refute
the current surveys, one must be able to find a corresponded in the
common mode. Otherwise we are to conclude that you "invented" your
survey. Bias will always exist. But I have observed that there is a
group of "conservative" people that believe nooned but them can be right
and only liberals will disagree with them. The "unofficial survey" you
have is not valid by your own admission above.
josephus


You show a clear far right attitude. I am a political nuetral. That I
understand means I am left of everyone you know.

You're not a political neutral; you're a self-absorbed horse's *****.

Science is not one thing. that we can agree, but the attack on science
is deeply disturbing for its consequences. The WEDGE strategy will
erode the laws in place. The fact that these are extremest and a very
small group of people should not hide the fact that they have
considerable politcal influence. This is how they keep appearing in the
news trying to get religion into school.

I certainly don't want ID taught in the schools... nor do I want political
correctness to color the currently available science, and that's a far more
prevalent problem currently than is ID.

Mike Sigman

I do want to point out that you are seriously out of kilter, if you
cannot trust any established survey as being too liberal.

On Thu, 20 Jan 2005, "Mike Sigman" <mikesigman@bresnan.net> wrote:

"Bobby D. Bryant" <bdbryant@mail.utexas.edu> wrote in message
news:csoole$oah$2@geraldo.cc.utexas.edu...

On Thu, 20 Jan 2005, "Mike Sigman" <mikesigman@bresnan.net> wrote:

"Bobby D. Bryant" <bdbryant@mail.utexas.edu> wrote in message
news:csoivc$lgj$1@geraldo.cc.utexas.edu...

On Thu, 20 Jan 2005, "Mike Sigman" <mikesigman@bresnan.net> wrote:

He's a pompous *****. There are lots of them on both sides.

But curiously, they aren't equally represented in the media.

Then you need to quit watching Fox and watch Chris Matthews on
Hardball. I can't stand either one of the egomaniacs. As far as
the "media" goes, the last 3 "non-partisan" surveys I've seen show
that the news is undoubtedly slanted in favor of the Left

Yeah, you can tell by the relative amount of time/space spent on
lying about a ***** vs lying about the reasons for starting a war.

, but O'Reilly, Mathews, Limbaugh, NPR's shows,
etc., etc., fall into the "opinion" category, so their slants
aren't measured.

I.e., your reply didn't have anything to do with my comment.

Your comment was about the media. You try to suggest without any
support that there are more Right Wing assholes in the media. The
"media" is dominated by left wingers, according to every survey on
record.

Actually, my comment -- as quoted above -- was about the relative
representation of pompous assholes in the media, and you arbitrarily
decided to exclude the major class of pompous assholes in your attempt
to refute me.

As for media bias, should I trust your surveys, or trust what I
actually see in the media?

As for media bias, should I trust your surveys, or trust what I actually
see in the media?

"Alan Jeffery" <observa_no_spam@xtra.co.nz> wrote in message
news:358ok6F4ch0boU1@individual.net...

"Mike Sigman" <mikesigman@bresnan.net> wrote in message
news:358llaF4j92rjU1@individual.net...

"Tom McDonald"
<tmcdonald2672@nohormelcharter.net.lga.highwinds-media.com>
wrote in message news:K7FHd.213$GJ2.172@fe03.lga...

Michael Altarriba wrote:

Once one understands that Bill O'Reilly's goal is to get people to
emote (preferably with the emotions of fear, anger, or both) instead
of
think, his mouth noises began to make a certain amount of sense. That
he is a fixture of Fox News also makes a certain amount of sense, as
the material produced by this network has a similar goal... well, that
and maximizing the value of their advertising slots (a goal they share
with all other contemporary for-profit news organizations... for most
of them, it's the only goal).

I started reading the transcript, but had to stop at this tidbit:

GRANT: Science is always incomplete in all areas.

O'REILLY: Well, I don't agree with that. Science is not always
incomplete and I'll give you an example. There are twenty-four hours
in a day. Alright. That's science. And there are four seasons.
That's science.


I had to stop reading... it hurt too much to go on.

Me too. But then, after the stitch from laughing went away, I
finished it. Really, really funny stuff. The whole loufa thing
makes more sense now; he has no frontal lobe activity at all.
What he thinks, or what he feels, having no filter, just spits
out of his mouth, willy-nilly.

I should watch him more. Could use the laughs.

I wish more people here *would* read him and comment. I could use the
laughs. This is a great set of non-partisan posts. There's the
"ditto-heads" and their mindless mutterings and then there's the extreme
liberals and their mutterings. What's the diff?

Well, I did read it. I thought he was extremely rude, and was more
interested in entertaining than informing. I suspect Grant was rather
taken
aback. From what I've seen people like O'Reilly use people like Grant as
foils to make fun of. I'm afraid that if that is a common method of
"discussion" on US TV (and I'm afraid it's starting to go there in NZ)
then
I think it would be better if people turn their TVs off. But that sort of
judgment didn't stop people going to the arena to see the gladiators chop
eachother up, did it?

He's a pompous *****. There are lots of them on both sides. To sit and
poke fun only at the assholes who don't agree with one's own partisan
beliefs makes for just as humorous a situation as the ***** is making.

"Tom McDonald"
<tmcdonald2672@nohormelcharter.net.lga.highwinds-media.com> wrote in
message news:K7FHd.213$GJ2.172@fe03.lga...

Michael Altarriba wrote:

Once one understands that Bill O'Reilly's goal is to get people to
emote (preferably with the emotions of fear, anger, or both) instead
of think, his mouth noises began to make a certain amount of sense.
That he is a fixture of Fox News also makes a certain amount of
sense, as the material produced by this network has a similar
goal... well, that and maximizing the value of their advertising
slots (a goal they share with all other contemporary for-profit news
organizations... for most of them, it's the only goal).

I started reading the transcript, but had to stop at this tidbit:

GRANT: Science is always incomplete in all areas.

O'REILLY: Well, I don't agree with that. Science is not always
incomplete and I'll give you an example. There are twenty-four hours
in a day. Alright. That's science. And there are four seasons.
That's science.


I had to stop reading... it hurt too much to go on.

Me too. But then, after the stitch from laughing went away, I
finished it. Really, really funny stuff. The whole loufa thing
makes more sense now; he has no frontal lobe activity at all.
What he thinks, or what he feels, having no filter, just spits
out of his mouth, willy-nilly.

I should watch him more. Could use the laughs.

I wish more people here *would* read him and comment. I could use the
laughs. This is a great set of non-partisan posts. There's the
"ditto-heads" and their mindless mutterings and then there's the
extreme liberals and their mutterings. What's the diff?




Mike

"Mike Sigman" <mikesigman@bresnan.net> wrote in message
news:358llaF4j92rjU1@individual.net...

"Tom McDonald" <tmcdonald2672@nohormelcharter.net.lga.highwinds-media.com>
wrote in message news:K7FHd.213$GJ2.172@fe03.lga...

Michael Altarriba wrote:

Once one understands that Bill O'Reilly's goal is to get people to
emote (preferably with the emotions of fear, anger, or both) instead of
think, his mouth noises began to make a certain amount of sense. That
he is a fixture of Fox News also makes a certain amount of sense, as
the material produced by this network has a similar goal... well, that
and maximizing the value of their advertising slots (a goal they share
with all other contemporary for-profit news organizations... for most
of them, it's the only goal).

I started reading the transcript, but had to stop at this tidbit:

GRANT: Science is always incomplete in all areas.

O'REILLY: Well, I don't agree with that. Science is not always
incomplete and I'll give you an example. There are twenty-four hours
in a day. Alright. That's science. And there are four seasons.
That's science.


I had to stop reading... it hurt too much to go on.

Me too. But then, after the stitch from laughing went away, I
finished it. Really, really funny stuff. The whole loufa thing
makes more sense now; he has no frontal lobe activity at all.
What he thinks, or what he feels, having no filter, just spits
out of his mouth, willy-nilly.

I should watch him more. Could use the laughs.

I wish more people here *would* read him and comment. I could use the
laughs. This is a great set of non-partisan posts. There's the
"ditto-heads" and their mindless mutterings and then there's the extreme
liberals and their mutterings. What's the diff?

Well, I did read it. I thought he was extremely rude, and was more
interested in entertaining than informing. I suspect Grant was rather taken
aback. From what I've seen people like O'Reilly use people like Grant as
foils to make fun of. I'm afraid that if that is a common method of
"discussion" on US TV (and I'm afraid it's starting to go there in NZ) then
I think it would be better if people turn their TVs off. But that sort of
judgment didn't stop people going to the arena to see the gladiators chop
eachother up, did it?

Alan Jeffery

Mike

"Tom McDonald" <tmcdonald2672@nohormelcharter.net.lga.highwinds-media.com>
wrote in message news:K7FHd.213$GJ2.172@fe03.lga...

Michael Altarriba wrote:

Once one understands that Bill O'Reilly's goal is to get people to
emote (preferably with the emotions of fear, anger, or both) instead of
think, his mouth noises began to make a certain amount of sense. That
he is a fixture of Fox News also makes a certain amount of sense, as
the material produced by this network has a similar goal... well, that
and maximizing the value of their advertising slots (a goal they share
with all other contemporary for-profit news organizations... for most
of them, it's the only goal).

I started reading the transcript, but had to stop at this tidbit:

GRANT: Science is always incomplete in all areas.

O'REILLY: Well, I don't agree with that. Science is not always
incomplete and I'll give you an example. There are twenty-four hours
in a day. Alright. That's science. And there are four seasons.
That's science.


I had to stop reading... it hurt too much to go on.

Me too. But then, after the stitch from laughing went away, I
finished it. Really, really funny stuff. The whole loufa thing
makes more sense now; he has no frontal lobe activity at all.
What he thinks, or what he feels, having no filter, just spits
out of his mouth, willy-nilly.

I should watch him more. Could use the laughs.

I wish more people here *would* read him and comment. I could use the
laughs. This is a great set of non-partisan posts. There's the
"ditto-heads" and their mindless mutterings and then there's the extreme
liberals and their mutterings. What's the diff?

"Tom McDonald" <tmcdonald2672@nohormelcharter.net.lga.highwinds-media.com>
wrote in message news:K7FHd.213$GJ2.172@fe03.lga...

Michael Altarriba wrote:

Once one understands that Bill O'Reilly's goal is to get people to
emote (preferably with the emotions of fear, anger, or both) instead of
think, his mouth noises began to make a certain amount of sense. That
he is a fixture of Fox News also makes a certain amount of sense, as
the material produced by this network has a similar goal... well, that
and maximizing the value of their advertising slots (a goal they share
with all other contemporary for-profit news organizations... for most
of them, it's the only goal).

I started reading the transcript, but had to stop at this tidbit:

GRANT: Science is always incomplete in all areas.

O'REILLY: Well, I don't agree with that. Science is not always
incomplete and I'll give you an example. There are twenty-four hours
in a day. Alright. That's science. And there are four seasons.
That's science.


I had to stop reading... it hurt too much to go on.

Me too. But then, after the stitch from laughing went away, I
finished it. Really, really funny stuff. The whole loufa thing
makes more sense now; he has no frontal lobe activity at all.
What he thinks, or what he feels, having no filter, just spits
out of his mouth, willy-nilly.

I should watch him more. Could use the laughs.

I wish more people here *would* read him and comment. I could use the
laughs. This is a great set of non-partisan posts. There's the
"ditto-heads" and their mindless mutterings and then there's the extreme
liberals and their mutterings. What's the diff?

Mike

The whole loufa thing
makes more sense now; he has no frontal lobe activity at all.
What he thinks, or what he feels, having no filter, just spits
out of his mouth, willy-nilly.

Me too. But then, after the stitch from laughing went away, I
finished it. Really, really funny stuff. The whole loufa thing
makes more sense now; he has no frontal lobe activity at all.
What he thinks, or what he feels, having no filter, just spits
out of his mouth, willy-nilly.

Once one understands that Bill O'Reilly's goal is to get people to
emote (preferably with the emotions of fear, anger, or both) instead of
think, his mouth noises began to make a certain amount of sense. That
he is a fixture of Fox News also makes a certain amount of sense, as
the material produced by this network has a similar goal... well, that
and maximizing the value of their advertising slots (a goal they share
with all other contemporary for-profit news organizations... for most
of them, it's the only goal).

I started reading the transcript, but had to stop at this tidbit:

GRANT: Science is always incomplete in all areas.

O'REILLY: Well, I don't agree with that. Science is not always
incomplete and I'll give you an example. There are twenty-four hours
in a day. Alright. That's science. And there are four seasons.
That's science.

I had to stop reading... it hurt too much to go on.

Once one understands that Bill O'Reilly's goal is to get people to
emote (preferably with the emotions of fear, anger, or both) instead of
think, his mouth noises began to make a certain amount of sense. That
he is a fixture of Fox News also makes a certain amount of sense, as
the material produced by this network has a similar goal... well, that
and maximizing the value of their advertising slots (a goal they share
with all other contemporary for-profit news organizations... for most
of them, it's the only goal).

I started reading the transcript, but had to stop at this tidbit:

GRANT: Science is always incomplete in all areas.

O'REILLY: Well, I don't agree with that. Science is not always
incomplete and I'll give you an example. There are twenty-four hours
in a day. Alright. That's science. And there are four seasons.
That's science.


I had to stop reading... it hurt too much to go on.