Does Fox News have a good "reputation"?

Discussion in 'Politics' started by garbonzo, Dec 4, 2013.

  1. joepistole Deacon Blues Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,910
    Apparently from the Republican/conservative viewpoint Pope Francis has been reading too much Bible and not Ayn Rand. That in itself is a mortal sin from the Republican/conservative point of view.

    PS I cringe every time I use the word "conservative" with respect to Fox News and the likes of Rush Limbaugh because the truth be told there is nothing conservative about them. They are radicals and Saul Alinsky's, "Rules For Radicals" is their gospel - one of their sacred texts.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. billvon Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    21,635
    Q: How do you know you're a right wing extremist?
    A: When you think the Pope is some leftie Marxist.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. billvon Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    21,635
    Keep in mind that Rupert Murdoch has admitted to trying to manipulate the news to support his political goals, such as the entry into the Iraq war. Such manipulation can explain why FOX viewers are historically more misinformed than viewers of other news shows; they hear news intended to sway their opinion to opinions that FOX wants them to have, rather than the news itself. Since often these opinions are conservative, there is little outcry from their viewer base when this happens.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Captain Kremmen All aboard, me Hearties! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,738
    The problem with Marxism is human corruptibility.
    The problem with Capitalism is human corruptibility.
    It's not the system that is the problem.

    I see them as two valid ways of tackling problems.
    You can use both within the same Government.
    If one isn't working to solve a particular problem, switch to the other.
     
  8. joepistole Deacon Blues Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,910
    LOL, l take it you like putting lipstick on pigs. The facts are pretty clear, unpleasant as they may be for you. The facts are in academic survey after survey, Fox News viewers have consistently been found to be the most misinformed - more misinformed than folks who watch no news at all!

    Your claim that CNN is moderately left betrays your very extreme conservative bent and biases. Additionally MSNBC is in no way similar to or comparable to Fox News and company. MSNBC has some very conservative talk show hosts like Joe Scarborough, a former Republican congressman. And unlike Fox News and the rest of the Republican entertainment industry, MSNBC and CNN hosts are bound by traditional journalistic standards. They don’t give money to partisan causes. They don’t raise money for partisan purposes as Fox News and their fellow conservative hosts and personalities do. Nor do they sell memorabilia as Fox News hosts do.

    http://www.billoreilly.com/

    If Fox News stopped the lying and deceit, I would watch more of it. I like a good debate. I like hearing opposing opinions. I like hosts who ask the tough questions of their guests. But I really see no point in listening or viewing a source that has nothing to offer but partisan fiction. I like my news honest, relevant and without spin and that is not what you get with Fox. Fox treats their viewers like mushrooms. It keeps them in the dark and feeds them shit. And it shows up repeatedly in credible surveys after survey.

    Fox plants false stories and conducts dirty tricks.

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/lifes...56a620-3cc2-11e3-a94f-b58017bfee6c_story.html

    The founder and CEO, Rupert Murdoch, has used bribery and illegally tapped phones to further his interests. Rupert Murdoch was named Scoundrel of the Year by Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington. And that is undisputed.

    You may need or like someone blowing smoke up your ass (e.g. Fox News). But if you are an objective bloke who likes honest, relevant information, why the hell would you want to listen to or watch Fox News?

    And you don’t have to look far to see Fox falsehoods; just turn on a TV set. According to Fox, Romney was going to win the 2012 election…oops. The economy was going to rush into recession/depression if President Obama won reelection…oops. Fox News contributor Sarah Palin told us about the death panels in Obamacare…oops. The Obama stimulus wouldn’t work and would ruin the economy…oops. Obamacare is government run healthcare…oops. A government shut down and debt default is no big deal…oops. And you can go on and on. And then Fox wants you to believe they are "fair and balanced". Oh please, anyone with half a brain can figure that one out.

    http://www.salon.com/2013/10/18/ins...ine_i_fact_checked_sean_hannity_on_obamacare/

    If you like being lied to and misinformed, then Fox is your thing then Fox is for you. But personally I don’t like being lied to. It isn’t intellectually challenging, it doesn’t allow me to make better decisions. It is an utter waste of time.
     
  9. joepistole Deacon Blues Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,910
    LOL, that is good!
     
  10. joepistole Deacon Blues Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,910
    Well since Marxism does not support or endorse religious institutions and advocates violent revolution, I would say your notion that Jesus was a Marxist is a little off base. Jesus may have been a socialist. But a Marxist, I don’t think so.

    “The first requisite for the happiness of the people is the abolition of religion.” – Karl Marx

    http://www.forbes.com/sites/billflax/2011/05/12/do-marxism-and-christianity-have-anything-in-common/
     
    Last edited: Dec 6, 2013
  11. Fraggle Rocker Staff Member

    Messages:
    24,690
    But there's more to it. The basic problem with Marxism is that it relies on people caring about their fellow citizens, so that they will do a fair share of the work in order for everyone to have enough. This only works in small, homogeneous communities where everyone truly does regard everyone else as his brother. It completely breaks down in large nations in which the average citizen regards most of the others as anonymous strangers with whom he has no connection--or worse yet, some other community whom they don't even like very much. This is why it kinda worked in Bulgaria, but barely managed in Czechoslovakia, and failed miserably in the USSR, where the Estonians, Ukrainians and Russians all hated each other.

    In capitalist countries, everyone works for his own prosperity, so they're motivated. Of course this breaks down when the business leaders take advantage of the system and allocate too large a share of the profits to themselves. This is why it works better in Germany, where the average CEO earns 10x as much as his average employee, than in the USA, where the average CEO "earns" 200x as much as his average employee. 60 years ago we were more like Germany and the system worked much better.
     
  12. billvon Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    21,635
    Exactly. Any pure "-ism" has the same problem. Runaway capitalism is as bad as runaway Marxism (or socialism, or communism, or choose-your-ism.) One of the strengths of the US is that we pick and choose from all available systems and use the parts of each that work.
     
  13. spidergoat pubic diorama Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    54,036
    It is the problem of the system if it can't take into account human nature.
     
  14. joepistole Deacon Blues Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,910
    You are correct, the world is too complicated and varied for a one size fits all approach. And that is where the American conservative movement has gone astray. Aided and abetted by unscrupulous media like Fox News, the conservative party emphasis has become ideological purity, and not the welfare of the nation.

    And a mixed economy is not only the strength of the American system; it is the strength of every wealthy nation. That is how they became wealthy and how they remain wealthy.
     
  15. billvon Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    21,635
    Agreed, although the left wing is often just as bad; again a balance is important.
     
  16. joepistole Deacon Blues Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,910
    Yeah, there are left wing whackos too. But they haven’t been calling the shots for the party for last two decades nor do they have anything remotely similar to the Republican/conservative propaganda machine. The current Democratic Party is a very moderate party, thanks to the liberal excesses of the 1970’s and the conservative backlash which followed.
     
  17. Captain Kremmen All aboard, me Hearties! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,738
    Good point.
    Traditional Capitalism works so long as you have true competition and don't have monopolies and cliques.
    It is about the creation of a middle class.
    The bigger the business, the more efficient it can be.
    How do you stop a few businesses from taking over the whole market?

    @Fraggle
    It is possible to have an ethos of service within particular professions.
    Standards can also be monitored to weed out lazy or incompetent people.
     
    Last edited: Dec 7, 2013
  18. joepistole Deacon Blues Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,910
    You have hit the nail on the head. Capitalism works, not because of greed, but because of competition. You can have greed without competition (e.g. monopolies and oligopolies). Greed exists with and without government regulation. Uncontrolled capitalism, inevitably leads to monopolization and a loss of competition as we saw in the era of robber barons.

    Larger businesses can only be more efficient if there are economies of scale and competition in the marketplace.

    Traditionally we have stopped monopolization with anti-trust laws. However, monopolists have been able to skirt those laws by exploiting weaknesses in our system of government. They merely need to get Congress to carve out exemptions for them (e.g. American Medical Society, National Football League, Major League Baseball, health insurance companies, etc.). And it always helps to get industry friendly regulators to regulate your industry.

    So the answer lies in fixing our government and the way we elect or officials. We need to take the special interest money out of our election process and make sure our voters are better informed when they go to the election box. Two, we need to insist upon ethics reform for our public servants. We as citizens should insist that our elected officials and regulators are constrained by the same ethics any major employer in America expects of their employees. The revolving door between industry and government needs to be severely curtained and monitored. And congressmen should not be able to use their position to walk into lucrative lobbying posts and to obtain such positions for their spouses and children. And no more gifts from lobbyists. Our government needs to be of and for the people rather than of and for the few.
     
    Last edited: Dec 7, 2013
  19. billvon Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    21,635
    But you cannot have competition without greed. It is the essential driver of capitalism. (Keep in mind that, even in the case of monopolies, a lot of money gets made - thus from a macro level the system still works.)

    Even your special interest money? If you want to contribute to a campaign for a senator who promises to reduce the influence of big corporations on government, should you be prevented from doing that, lest your special interest affect the election?

    That's not saying much. Enron, Halliburton, Exxon and Blackwater were (are) major employers.

    I think the opposite. We need fewer career politicians and more schoolteachers/engineers/business owners who take two years off from their jobs to serve on a state legislature - and then go back to their jobs when they are done.
     
  20. joepistole Deacon Blues Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,910
    No, that isn’t true. Our educational systems, as an example, are filled with students every day who compete with each other on the sports fields and classrooms across the nation. There are sports leagues in virtually every sport that play and compete just for the fun of it. People compete for a lot of reasons, greed is just one reason. Greed isn’t’ the only reason.

    That senator should not be for sale to the highest bidder as is the case today. Government should act in reasoned ways and in the interests of the American middle class. The point is, I shouldn’t need to pay off a senator in order to get him to act in the best interest of the nation.

    Yes it is saying much. There is a difference between the leaders, the CEO’s and boards and rank and file employees. Those corporations want their employees serving only one master, their employer. They want and demand their employees act in the best interest of the corporation. I worked for many years in corporate America and every year my employer had me read and sign a “conflict of interest” statement where I was required to disclose any potential conflicts of interest. People serving in our government, especially elected officials and regulators should have no conflicts of interest.

    That isn’t what I said. I said there should not be a revolving door between government and private industry – case in point Billy Tauzin. Tauzin used in position in congress to pass some very lucrative legislation for the pharmaceutical industry at the expense of the American taxpayer and was rewarded with a multimillion dollar job as a lobbyist. If Sally teacher wants to serve as an elected official for a few years and then go back to her job fine, but she shouldn’t be rewarded for her votes with a lucrative job in another industry like lobbying. Term limits do nothing to limit corruption in our elected officials. It does nothing to change the influence of special interest money. Our government should act in the interests of the nation and not act for the few at the expense of the many as it does today.
     
  21. billvon Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    21,635
    Agreed. To be more clear, you cannot have competition in capitalism without greed. Two companies competing to donate the most to charity, for example, is not an example of capitalism in action. (However, profiting from the perception that you are philanthropic is.)

    Even if the highest bidder represents a group individual people who want their own interests, rather than corporate interests, represented?

    Disagree 100%. The government should act in the interests of all, even the poor.


    Exactly. I'd rather have our politicians act in the best interests of the people, not "the corporation" (the government.)


    I think there should be - as well as between educational and government. People should not make careers of politics. They should be businessmen, educators etc who take a few years to serve in government. That way the government is run by real people, not career politicians.

    Agreed. And we can do that best by eliminating career politicians, and instead of a wall, have a revolving door between the business of the country and the government. That way the government is run by us, rather than someone whose relies on politics and political favors for their livelihood.
     
  22. kwhilborn Banned Banned

    Messages:
    2,088
    Watch OBAMA screw it to the Fox news team....

    [video=youtube;k8TwRmX6zs4]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k8TwRmX6zs4[/video]




    p.s. This video made me laugh a lot.
     
  23. Captain Kremmen All aboard, me Hearties! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,738
    That's true.
    I used to have great admiration for James Dyson.
    He wanted to start from scratch with the vacuum cleaner, and create something better.
    His intention was not to make a fortune, but to be a better engineer.
    If you have a good lifestyle springing from your hard work, luck, and intelligence, that isn't greed.
    I lost my admiration for James Dyson when he switched his manufacture from Wiltshire, where he had built up his business, to Malaysia.
    Pure greed.

    Initially, all Dyson vacuum cleaners and washing machines were made in Malmesbury, Wiltshire. In 2002, the company transferred vacuum cleaner production to Malaysia. Dyson stated that they requested planning permission to expand the factory to increase vacuum cleaner production, but that this application failed. However, the local government says that no such permission was ever sought, as the land Dyson planned to use was privately owned and the original owner did not want to sell. As Dyson was the major manufacturing company in Wiltshire outside Swindon, this move aroused some controversy. A year later, washing machine production was also moved to Malaysia.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dyson_(company)
     
    Last edited: Dec 8, 2013

Share This Page