[quote]Makavali wrote:
dhickey wrote:
Makavali wrote:
I take the news from him the same way I take the news from the Fox News Network.
With a grain of salt. You people make it out like it’s only liberals that have infected the supposedly impartial media.
LOL
John Stewart = Fox News. This says all that needs to be said about you.
Don’t get me wrong, John Stewart is infinitely better than Fox news.[/quote]
even clearer now.
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
There has never been a real debate on the Daily Show. It’s all just smoke and mirrors to keep the stupid liberal kiddies in a disinformation coma.
But keep watching…I’m sure he’ll eventually say something funny and apt – probably even offend some people that need to be offended – and then apologize for it.
Weak sauce!![/quote]
X2
Funny if I am drunk, otherwise, taking up good oxygen.
[quote]dhickey wrote:
Makavali wrote:
dhickey wrote:
Makavali wrote:
I take the news from him the same way I take the news from the Fox News Network.
With a grain of salt. You people make it out like it’s only liberals that have infected the supposedly impartial media.
LOL
John Stewart = Fox News. This says all that needs to be said about you.
Don’t get me wrong, John Stewart is infinitely better than Fox news.
even clearer now.
[/quote]
Please. If you use either for a reliable source of news, then I’d suggest you check into Bellvue.
[quote]Makavali wrote:
dhickey wrote:
Makavali wrote:
dhickey wrote:
Makavali wrote:
I take the news from him the same way I take the news from the Fox News Network.
With a grain of salt. You people make it out like it’s only liberals that have infected the supposedly impartial media.
LOL
John Stewart = Fox News. This says all that needs to be said about you.
Don’t get me wrong, John Stewart is infinitely better than Fox news.
even clearer now.
Please. If you use either for a reliable source of news, then I’d suggest you check into Bellvue.[/quote]
So no programs on Fox are news? Outside of Hannity, OReily, and Huckabee there are actually some decent new programs. I don’t catch them that often but they are better then other new shows. What sourses do you think are better?
[quote]dhickey wrote:
Makavali wrote:
dhickey wrote:
Makavali wrote:
dhickey wrote:
Makavali wrote:
I take the news from him the same way I take the news from the Fox News Network.
With a grain of salt. You people make it out like it’s only liberals that have infected the supposedly impartial media.
LOL
John Stewart = Fox News. This says all that needs to be said about you.
Don’t get me wrong, John Stewart is infinitely better than Fox news.
even clearer now.
Please. If you use either for a reliable source of news, then I’d suggest you check into Bellvue.
So no programs on Fox are news? Outside of Hannity, OReily, and Huckabee there are actually some decent new programs. I don’t catch them that often but they are better then other new shows. What sourses do you think are better?[/quote]
I avoid the news. There’s too much liberal/conservative bias. If I really need to know something I’ll get my source from both and average things out with a more liberal leaning.
[quote]Makavali wrote:
dhickey wrote:
Makavali wrote:
dhickey wrote:
Makavali wrote:
dhickey wrote:
Makavali wrote:
I take the news from him the same way I take the news from the Fox News Network.
With a grain of salt. You people make it out like it’s only liberals that have infected the supposedly impartial media.
LOL
John Stewart = Fox News. This says all that needs to be said about you.
Don’t get me wrong, John Stewart is infinitely better than Fox news.
even clearer now.
Please. If you use either for a reliable source of news, then I’d suggest you check into Bellvue.
So no programs on Fox are news? Outside of Hannity, OReily, and Huckabee there are actually some decent new programs. I don’t catch them that often but they are better then other new shows. What sourses do you think are better?
I avoid the news. There’s too much liberal/conservative bias. If I really need to know something I’ll get my source from both and average things out with a more liberal leaning.[/quote]
So if fox says Obama is bad and NBC say Obama is good, he must be mediocre? That’s horseshit. You don’t average anything out.
You read, you listen, you understand, you reason, you form an opinion. There are different kinds and degrees of bias. There is bias that only selects certain stories. This doesn’t make it untrue. There is bias that pick and distorts certain facks within a story. This is more devious and shouldn’t be averaged with anything.
Knowledge comes from understanding and reasoning, not from taking a tally of what pundits say and averaging them out.
[quote]dhickey wrote:
So if fox says Obama is bad and NBC say Obama is good, he must be mediocre? That’s horseshit. You don’t average anything out.
You read, you listen, you understand, you reason, you form an opinion. There are different kinds and degrees of bias. There is bias that only selects certain stories. This doesn’t make it untrue. There is bias that pick and distorts certain facks within a story. This is more devious and shouldn’t be averaged with anything.
Knowledge comes from understanding and reasoning, not from taking a tally of what pundits say and averaging them out.[/quote]
Now you’re assuming too much based on words on the internets (srs bzns). If one says he’s good and one says he’s bad, I’d spend a lot more time asking why they didn’t provide reasoning for their opinons. Even better, why is the “impartial” news telling me he’s good or bad? A better story is how he did this today or did that today.
[quote]Makavali wrote:
dhickey wrote:
So if fox says Obama is bad and NBC say Obama is good, he must be mediocre? That’s horseshit. You don’t average anything out.
You read, you listen, you understand, you reason, you form an opinion. There are different kinds and degrees of bias. There is bias that only selects certain stories. This doesn’t make it untrue. There is bias that pick and distorts certain facks within a story. This is more devious and shouldn’t be averaged with anything.
Knowledge comes from understanding and reasoning, not from taking a tally of what pundits say and averaging them out.
Now you’re assuming too much based on words on the internets (srs bzns). If one says he’s good and one says he’s bad, I’d spend a lot more time asking why they didn’t provide reasoning for their opinons. Even better, why is the “impartial” news telling me he’s good or bad? A better story is how he did this today or did that today.[/quote]
Sorry, I am not getting you. First you say you don’t read or listen to the news becuase it’s too biased. but then there is some special event where you will absorb the the news in some fasion. You take this info, average it out and put a liberal slant on it. Sorry, that just sounds like an incredibly poor way of processing information. It sounds like the process I use for making homemade irish creme. Combine a couple of recipes and add more booze.
As a “misguided youth” I can say that I love Jon Stewart. I love his show, not ecause its "news"but because it taught me a valuable lesson. That lesson is that anything can be twisted in any way. I really hope nobody really counts my generation out that much. We arent as dumb as you old folks like to make it seem. Many of us realze the fact that there is no such thing as a “news show”. However, there are TV shows where people try to tell us things in an “critical” way to try to get us on a certain side.
I mean, lets be real here. What kind of parent does it take to raise a stupid kid? The answer is a stupid parent! The habits my peers have developed only manifested because the previous gens have allowed them to. Or, hey, maybe its just “kids being kids”. Another thought could be socal evolution where there is a disconect between parent/child