Rex Kickass Posted March 11, 2008 Share Posted March 11, 2008 QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Mar 11, 2008 -> 03:55 PM) Quote of the Day Saying that Hillary Clinton has White House experience is like saying Yoko Ono was a Beatle. That gives Hillary a lot of credit. Yoko Ono actually appeared on a fair amount of Beatles tracks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BearSox Posted March 12, 2008 Share Posted March 12, 2008 I just wanted to bring this up because I had this discussion earlier today... what percentage of people actually know what Obama's policies are (or what he says they are) and agree with them? I don't think very much, as my opinion is that most people don't know a lick about him, but rather have been brain-washed (not as extreme as that, but that is the best word I could think of to describe it) by most of the media that the War in Iraq is evil and Obama is the greatest person ever, etc... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthSideSox72 Posted March 12, 2008 Share Posted March 12, 2008 QUOTE(BearSox @ Mar 11, 2008 -> 08:03 PM) I just wanted to bring this up because I had this discussion earlier today... what percentage of people actually know what Obama's policies are (or what he says they are) and agree with them? I don't think very much, as my opinion is that most people don't know a lick about him, but rather have been brain-washed (not as extreme as that, but that is the best word I could think of to describe it) by most of the media that the War in Iraq is evil and Obama is the greatest person ever, etc... I'd say about the same percentage as know Clinton's policies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted March 12, 2008 Author Share Posted March 12, 2008 QUOTE(Alpha Dog @ Mar 10, 2008 -> 11:05 PM) OK,. check this out. ABC has a slide show of 13 political sex scandals. Guess how many of them who are Dems actually are named as Dems? And then guess how many who are Repubs are named as repubs? No cheating, guess before you look. If I counted right, they picked 5 Dems and 7 Repubs. How many of each were named as such? http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/Blotter/pop...x=1&page=13 And for all those liberal who claim that there is no bias, the old media can put a stop to this any time they want by instituting a style guideline, that says something like a politician's party affiliation must be mentioned inthe first paragraph or when their name is first mentioned. But they don't, so they can just move that little D or R around to wherever it seems to fit best for them in the story, paragraph 1 or 15. So in your opinion the media should look at party affiliation and make certain that each party is mentioned equally? Clintion would have loved that during the Monica reporting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EvilMonkey Posted March 12, 2008 Share Posted March 12, 2008 (edited) QUOTE(Texsox @ Mar 11, 2008 -> 09:16 PM) So in your opinion the media should look at party affiliation and make certain that each party is mentioned equally? Clintion would have loved that during the Monica reporting. No Tex. If the media is reporting on a story, when they first mention the name, they should then put the party affiliation. "Today at the airport, Senator JOhn Jones (D-Vermont) was caught......". Oh I know, us conservatives are always seeing boogie men and such, but there is no reason to go a whole story about a governor or Senator or whatever without mentioning it up front. Bad stories or good stories. I can sort of see not mentioning it for the President. If people in this country have no idea what party the President is from, they have no business even voting. The first 3 stories I saw about Spitzer didn't mention that he was a Democrat at all. Then the next few mentioned it several paragraphs in. Now it is in the top 3, but only because they are mentioning that Republicans are considering trying to impeach him. Just be consistant, and you(not you, the media) can put a stop to this. http://www.bnd.com/news/nation/story/276459.html A story I just saw from the LA Times about the detroit mayor being a suspect in a stripper's slaying. No mention that he is a democrat anywhere. But I guess he is just a mayor. Edited March 12, 2008 by Alpha Dog Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted March 12, 2008 Author Share Posted March 12, 2008 I think it is a style issue that each newspaper should decide. If you are writing a story in Chicago about Daley, do you need the (D)? That gets redundant. Personally, if it is just for identification, I wish they would never mention it. How many people waited to see what party he was from before deciding how they would react? I just don't see editors sitting around making changes based on which party it is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EvilMonkey Posted March 12, 2008 Share Posted March 12, 2008 QUOTE(Texsox @ Mar 11, 2008 -> 11:30 PM) I think it is a style issue that each newspaper should decide. If you are writing a story in Chicago about Daley, do you need the (D)? That gets redundant. Personally, if it is just for identification, I wish they would never mention it. How many people waited to see what party he was from before deciding how they would react? I just don't see editors sitting around making changes based on which party it is. OK, same reporter, different stories, different parties, different 'styles'. http://www.bizzyblog.com/RenziIndictedAPstory022208.html Republican affiliation mentioned FIRST WORD Here is a story by the same reporter about a Democrat. But you wouldn't know it because they never mention it. Later in this same story they mention the D for Pelosi and the R for Boehner, who are quoted in the story, but nothing about the main guy. http://abcnews.go.com/print?id=3243945 You know Tex, it IS there. I don't mean they publish memos instruction reporters and editors on the proper way to sow Republicans as bad guys and to whitewash Dems misdeeds as much as possible, but somewhere in that pipeline, there is an effort, conscience or otherwise, to include or omit the designators. If you mention the affiliation in the first word for the first story, there is no reason that it shouldn't be mentioned first word in the second, as the opening paragraphs are almost the same, except for that omission. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whitesoxfan101 Posted March 12, 2008 Share Posted March 12, 2008 (edited) The Republican pity party and b****ing over a media witch hunt, and seeming feeling that democrats are given a total free pass during sex scandals, whle republicans are burned at the stake, is truly embarassing. I've just been shocked at the fact that seemingly the entire party is using Spitzer as a target of opportunity to cry like babies over media coverage, and it's pretty pathetic. Edited March 12, 2008 by whitesoxfan101 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EvilMonkey Posted March 12, 2008 Share Posted March 12, 2008 QUOTE(whitesoxfan101 @ Mar 12, 2008 -> 08:08 AM) The Republican pity party and b****ing over a media witch hunt, and seeming feeling that democrats are given a total free pass during sex scandals, whle republicans are burned at the stake, is truly embarassing. I've just been shocked at the fact that seemingly the entire party is using Spitzer as a target of opportunity to cry like babies over media coverage, and it's pretty pathetic. Did I saythey re given a free pass? if that were so, the story would be buried on page 9 the second day. You know as well as I that half the damn country doesn't pay attention at all to politics other than what the TV or newspapers tell them, especially as it gets closer to election time. So if the average dumbass voter only can recall seeing R in all the news stories about bad things, and no D's, that just my color their perception come election time. If the Dems are so squeeky f***ing clean, then just report the things as they happen and there is no story, no 'conspiracy'. But maybe subconsciously some reporters just can't take that chance. Why is it so damn hard to just note the damn affiliation with the name? Can you answer that one simple question? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whitesoxfan101 Posted March 12, 2008 Share Posted March 12, 2008 QUOTE(Alpha Dog @ Mar 12, 2008 -> 08:28 AM) Did I saythey re given a free pass? if that were so, the story would be buried on page 9 the second day. You know as well as I that half the damn country doesn't pay attention at all to politics other than what the TV or newspapers tell them, especially as it gets closer to election time. So if the average dumbass voter only can recall seeing R in all the news stories about bad things, and no D's, that just my color their perception come election time. If the Dems are so squeeky f***ing clean, then just report the things as they happen and there is no story, no 'conspiracy'. But maybe subconsciously some reporters just can't take that chance. Why is it so damn hard to just note the damn affiliation with the name? Can you answer that one simple question? I'll just get to the question in this rant, and the point of it. If you really think the networks are going out of their way just to note the affiliation of one party and not the other in sex scandals, your giving them way too much credit and thinking they are way smarter then they are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EvilMonkey Posted March 12, 2008 Share Posted March 12, 2008 QUOTE(whitesoxfan101 @ Mar 12, 2008 -> 12:20 PM) I'll just get to the question in this rant, and the point of it. If you really think the networks are going out of their way just to note the affiliation of one party and not the other in sex scandals, your giving them way too much credit and thinking they are way smarter then they are. No, you totally avoided the whole point. Why can't they just state the affiliation up front, all the time, and eliminate any b****ing by one side or the other? Are all their 'D' keys broken? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mr_genius Posted March 12, 2008 Share Posted March 12, 2008 QUOTE(whitesoxfan101 @ Mar 12, 2008 -> 12:20 PM) I'll just get to the question in this rant, and the point of it. If you really think the networks are going out of their way just to note the affiliation of one party and not the other in sex scandals, your giving them way too much credit and thinking they are way smarter then they are. Even a total idiot would know how to do that. How is that giving them too much credit for being smart? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mr_genius Posted March 12, 2008 Share Posted March 12, 2008 (edited) QUOTE(whitesoxfan101 @ Mar 12, 2008 -> 08:08 AM) The Republican pity party and b****ing over a media witch hunt, and seeming feeling that democrats are given a total free pass during sex scandals, whle republicans are burned at the stake, is truly embarassing. I've just been shocked at the fact that seemingly the entire party is using Spitzer as a target of opportunity to cry like babies over media coverage, and it's pretty pathetic. It's not pathetic it's a fact. If you don't like, vote dem. Say Katie Couric sent ya! edit: I take that back, don't listen to Couric. Vote McCain. Edited March 12, 2008 by mr_genius Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigSqwert Posted March 12, 2008 Share Posted March 12, 2008 It's rare that I give credit to GWB but I am happy that he signed the bill that changed the dates for DST. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted March 12, 2008 Share Posted March 12, 2008 QUOTE(BigSqwert @ Mar 12, 2008 -> 02:35 PM) It's rare that I give credit to GWB but I am happy that he signed the bill that changed the dates for DST. Why? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigSqwert Posted March 12, 2008 Share Posted March 12, 2008 QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Mar 12, 2008 -> 04:47 PM) Why? I like that is occurs earlier in spring and later in fall. Lot of darkness here in Chicago. Not all of us are as fortunate to live in sunny California. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted March 12, 2008 Share Posted March 12, 2008 QUOTE(BigSqwert @ Mar 12, 2008 -> 02:48 PM) I like that is occurs earlier in spring and later in fall. Lot of darkness here in Chicago. Not all of us are as fortunate to live in sunny California. I grew up in that area, and I think it's a bad idea. I posted a study in another thread showing how it actually has helped increase power consumption/CO2 emission around the country, using Indiana as its guide. And since half of my clocks automatically switched to DST on their own before the change, now all my clocks screw up an extra 2 times per year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whitesoxfan101 Posted March 12, 2008 Share Posted March 12, 2008 QUOTE(Alpha Dog @ Mar 12, 2008 -> 01:01 PM) No, you totally avoided the whole point. Why can't they just state the affiliation up front, all the time, and eliminate any b****ing by one side or the other? Are all their 'D' keys broken? Ignored the point? It's one article!! And as for my affiliation, I'm voting for McCain and have been a supporter of his for about a year now in this race. That doesn't change the fact that the never-ending whining of media bias from the far right is just sad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rex Kickass Posted March 12, 2008 Share Posted March 12, 2008 QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Mar 12, 2008 -> 06:08 PM) I grew up in that area, and I think it's a bad idea. I posted a study in another thread showing how it actually has helped increase power consumption/CO2 emission around the country, using Indiana as its guide. And since half of my clocks automatically switched to DST on their own before the change, now all my clocks screw up an extra 2 times per year. They did a study on any additional cost to taxpayers about having Indiana move to honoring DST and I think it cost the state's residents 8 million dollars in additional electricity/energy costs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted March 12, 2008 Share Posted March 12, 2008 QUOTE(Rex Kicka** @ Mar 12, 2008 -> 03:34 PM) They did a study on any additional cost to taxpayers about having Indiana move to honoring DST and I think it cost the state's residents 8 million dollars in additional electricity/energy costs. That's the study I alluded to in that post, and for once I was too lazy to hop over to the energy thread to look up the link. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted March 13, 2008 Share Posted March 13, 2008 QUOTE(BigSqwert @ Mar 12, 2008 -> 04:35 PM) It's rare that I give credit to GWB but I am happy that he signed the bill that changed the dates for DST. I agree. Life is much easier with light in the evening versus 6 am. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kapkomet Posted March 13, 2008 Share Posted March 13, 2008 QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Mar 13, 2008 -> 10:58 AM) I agree. Life is much easier with light in the evening versus 6 am. That's because you don't drive a John Deere to work. Snob. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted March 13, 2008 Author Share Posted March 13, 2008 QUOTE(Alpha Dog @ Mar 12, 2008 -> 01:01 PM) No, you totally avoided the whole point. Why can't they just state the affiliation up front, all the time, and eliminate any b****ing by one side or the other? Are all their 'D' keys broken? And what is the advantage to the newspapers in this nationwide plot? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EvilMonkey Posted March 14, 2008 Share Posted March 14, 2008 http://uk.news.yahoo.com/afp/20080312/img/...8f9b2ad981.html I see here that they note a party affiliation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
juddling Posted March 14, 2008 Share Posted March 14, 2008 QUOTE(Alpha Dog @ Mar 14, 2008 -> 04:12 AM) http://uk.news.yahoo.com/afp/20080312/img/...8f9b2ad981.html I see here that they note a party affiliation. I still think Spitzer played Gollum in the Lord of the Rings movies...lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts