How exactly does a self-respecting conservative watch Fox News and not be disgusted by the way the network functions?
Support the Blog — Buy This Book!
For Kindle and with free ePub version. Only $9.49 Great reading.
Here is what Gary Shapiro CEO of the Consumer Electronics Association (CEA) said: Dvorak's writing sings with insight and clarity. Whether or not you agree with John's views, he will get you thinking and is never boring. These essays are worth the read!
Put this ad on your blog!
Syndicate
Subscribe to Main Blog feed here:
Subscribe to Comments too (below):
Junk Email Filter
Fox News is for Right Wingers that put blinders on and dont want to see what the rest of the world is doing, You have to be a real moron to actualy Belive the ‘Fair and Balanced” Rupert Murdoch Crap that comes into your living rooms from this news channel. Its Right Wing Sensationalism, any one can see this.. The only way to be fair and balanced is to get your news Elsewhere.. After viewing the Slanted Fox News Views then make up your own mind.
#30 Fisher_X
Booo hooo… $3 Billion are being allocated to keep essential industries alive… that’s terrible… 750,000 cars will be replaced with newer more fuel efficient models… booo hooo…
You do realize that $3 billion is about 1 week of expenditures in Iraq. (U.S. Monthly Spending in Iraq – $12 billion in 2008) That would be $140 billion per year. About $800 billion of US taxpayers’ funds spent or approved for spending through mid-2009, including $76 billion requested by President Obama and approved by Congress.
Or let’s look at another taxpayer subsidized industry: the purchase of F-22 Raptors. So far invested $28 billion in the Raptor’s research, development and testing, not including the purchase of a single airplane. By the time all 183 fighters have been purchased, $34 billion will have been spent on actual procurement, resulting in a total program cost of $62 billion.
Gold plated military purchases = good. Spending money on helping the ‘regular’ economy = bad. I guess that’s one way to look at it.
self-respecting conservatives by definition do not watch Fox nausea except for giggles.
Does Uncle Dave plant these troll-meal stories to increase page views? Not that there’s anything wrong with that.
#32 Awake
First, thanks for your reply and taking the time to read my point. I appreciate it.
I am in total agreement with you on government spending programs being wasteful. That is my point on the cars program. Citing other examples of wrongs to prove another wrong is right doesn’t make sense to me.
I would disagree on a couple of points.
“essential industries” are NOT kept alive by creating false demand by overpaying for junk. We don’t even need to debate how essential the auto industry is to agree that selling cars this month, that would eventually be sold in the coming months doesn’t work. Look at the 0% APR and high rebate programs of the auto industry to see how that worked in the past.
Military spending is not all good, just as regular economy spending is not all bad. Good spending is good. Bad spending is bad. The junkers program and F-22 are both examples of BAD spending.
Lastly, the truly incremental estimate of cars sold, which would have not otherwise been sold without the program, is 22,000; not 750,000. So, 22,000 cars for 1B is about $45,000 per incremental vehicle. The government could have paid for and gave away new cars to the “poor” and got a better deal.
Pathetic. A bunch of Republicans zombies who just say anything Obama does is bad and Democrats who think everything Republicans ever do is bad. It’s just Crips vs Bloods. Each side KNOWS the other is evil and their good. The truth, children, is that they’re ALL politicians, some slightly more corrupt then others, some slightly more effective than others. But demonizing or deifying these guys like you kids do is TIRESOME. Grow up.
#34 – Fisher_X
I have seen those ‘per car’ costs thrown around, and they have absolutely no basis. Even Fox news says so, indicating that with overhead, the cost per car ‘may’ reach $6000. I would really like to see a reliable source that you can use to support your numbers.
The REAL number of vehicles involved (and still counting):
August 5, 2009
Dealer Transactions
Number Submitted: 184,304
Dollar Value: $775.2M
I know you didn’t just make your numbers up… I have heard them before, but they are just bull.
As to the value of the program to the economy… the ‘they would have bought later’ theory has been shown to be baseless by multiple economists.
And this whole argument also ignores the tax benefits provided by the rebate to the states and local communities. Buyers are still paying sales taxes, sellers are still paying income taxes. The actual cost when tax and economic benefit recovery is included is possibly nil.
How did the Faux News Anchor lose the argument? He asked questions based on what many here think, and she responded with Obama talking points that may or may not be true depending on exactly what it meant, how it is measured, the alternatives and so forth.
To me, the issue was completely unresolved in a “we present, you decide” sort of way. No win, no loss except for the listening public as no “facts” were presented by either side.
POINT: Evolution is a proven fact. COUNTER: No it isn’t.
Who won?
[Duplicate post — ed.]
17, Jeff
Cash for Clunkers did not run out of money in four days, as the law went into effect on 1 July, dealers had been holding the applications till 27 July when they could begin sending them in for redemption by the government. And taking 250,000 crappy cars off the road isn’t going to adversely hurt the used car market in a 10 Million NEW car market. And if they weren’t junked then take would take away the secondary point of getting older less efficient cars off the road.
No one can reliably predict to what extent cars are being turned in early. Having “economists” guess at it (based on what exactly?) is an appeal to authority. Aren’t economists more often wrong than right? Statistically this is possible because they love the either/or format because that is what they get paid to do. Reality more often bites them with choice #3-4 or 5 that they never thought of or were paid to ignore.
SO==CERTAINLY some percentage of the clunkers turned in would have been sold later. To that degree, poor people ARE hurt, the market is artificially manipulated to the DETRIMENT of our grandkiddies.
All the other factors mentioned by Awake in his excellent post are similarly affected. ie–sales tax would have come in later without the incentive for whatever percentage of cars.
Its debt financing artificial stimulus. Why not pay for old buggy whips as well?
PS–I’ve never had a post moderated. Am I grandfathered in, or just that completely irrelevant?
Bobbo…
There are several things to consider about this program, and timeliness is one of them. I certainly do not advocate having a program of this type at all times, but economic stimulus is badly needed NOW, or there may not people that can do the 0% thing for a very long time, or there may not be anyone left to sell cars at that rate. Our economy needs to be pulled out a nosedive NOW, or we could easily hit the ground catastrophically.
Yes, there is a tax burden that needs to be paid back… but it is probably much much smaller than what it appears to be on first look. It may even be revenue positive if it accelerates a recovery. Increased spending by the public increases tax revenue, reduces things like unemployment costs, etc.
(I get ‘moderated’ when I include links to other sites, some kind of Spam control in place)
[No you don’t. #37 has links and it’s up. Sometimes the spam catcher does put into the pending queue if there are a number of links, but you have to wait for it to be manually approved. — ed.]
28
He’s gone. I guess there was breaking news on Fox. That’s too bad,I really wanted to know how DailyKos altered the video.
Regarding Fox News’ ratings, sure Fox News may beat CNN and MSNBC but you know what beats Fox News? Spongebob Squarepants reruns. The fact is that cable news ratings are low. To argue that one of them has higher ratings is like arguing that being third to last in a marathon is better than being last.
Bobbo is correct, in what way does this clip show that the anchor lost a debate with the Senator?
He had good points. People may have been going to trade in their cars anyway and it absolutely takes used cars off the street which (supply and demand) dictates that costs for used cars will necessarily increase thereby reducing the ability for less affluent people to be able to purchase a vehicle that they can afford.
This is a non-event posted here to generate left versus right commentary and to drive up website hits, nothing more.
You guys are so funny, harping about how bad FoxNews is, and how much you hate them…
You claim that people who watch FoxNews are somehow uneducated, stupid, etc. Seems to be alot of you are watching…
What? You don’t watch FoxNews, then you’re really quallified to judge them or their viewers, are you?
It was said once, that half of Rush Limbaugh’s listners are people who hate him.
Watching FoxNews because you like them isn’t a indication of a lack of intelligence, but watching them, when you hate them, now thats just stupid…
Crap! The third line in my post should read:
What? You don’t watch FoxNews, then you’re NOT really qualified to judge them or their viewers, are you?
GOP TV is not news.
It’s the equivalent of the Sunday morning preacher rhetoric telling the sheep what they want to hear.
It must just be a slow news day for Fox Propaganda. Murdock and his minions will do anything to slant something that is actually helping the middle class, because as we all know, he wants to get rid of it.
DailyKos put in the headline, which doesn’t reflect what happened in my opinion. This blog has posted in the past about Fox’s ridiculous use of breaking news. He isn’t escaping the interview, as he certainly isn’t being routed in the argument.
Just like sports halls of fame, Fox needs to be judged by it’s contemporaries. Reasons to watch fox:
Dan Rather, Katie Couric, Matt Lauer, Brian Williams, Chris Mathews, Keith Olbermann, most local anchors in most major markets, hundreds more…
The MSM can regain regain America’s respect by showing objectivity and treating Obama, Pelosi and Reid EXACTLY the same way they treated Bush and Palin.
Tox, America does respect MSM. It’s Fox that most intelligent people ignore. See post #30…when the shit hits the fan CNN’s ratings skyrocket and Fox’s stagnate.
#53: I was visiting my in-laws in Arizona when Hurricane Katrina hit New Orleans. My father in law was watching Fox News to find out what was going on. He found out that Fox was managing the news toward a specific point of view (George W’s “Well Done” to the pathetic FEMA administrator, when people were dying), and stopped watching Fox News entirely until the day he died–no trust.
Fox News have no one to blame for the spin doctoring but themselves and Murdoch.
Not sure who produced this, or how legitimate it is. But it fits the patterns we see…
thank God we have great journalists out there like Time magazine that dares to do hard hitting investigative journalism about Obama’s………………golf game
>Basically you have one channel that caters to one sub-segment of the population (Fox), and that is all that sub-segment will watch. The rest of the population divides their attention amongst 4 other channels, and rarely if ever watches Fox.
Don’t let facts get in the way of your imagination. Conservatives, liberals, independents, watch Fox and all the other channels. I’d say Fox News gets its ratings partly by catering to conservatives and mostly from being a tabloid.
Dave is right.
Fox is a low-quality product.
I do like their spin better than I like CNN’s spin, but I often wish for better from them.
#55–Olo==why the backhand: “how legitimate it is”==snippets pasted together. No doubt it is what it is.
My favorite was Amy Goodman anti-establishment contradiction of Charlie Rose. He is one of the worst interviewers on TV with a near Sterling Reputation for the opposite. Amy destroyed him. Her 30 minute schedules interview was cut at the 20 minute mark replaced by adverts or future program BS. Charlie thanked here and that he looked forward to her future visits. Haven’t seen he since.
Hah, hah. Charlie Rose===fail.
MikeN…Awake is at least partially correct.
The right is focused on Fox, the left and Independents are spread out all over.
Bobbo…I just caught this on a less-than-centrist blog, and don’t know who made it or if it’s real. Without knowing that, it gets a disclaimer when posted under my anonymous handle. lol
#60, your post confirms what I said.
CNN: 51% Democrats, 18% Republicans, 23% independents
MSNBC: 45% Democrats, 18% Republicans, 27% independents
Fox News: 33% Democrats, 39% Republicans, 22% independents
CNN has 20% more viewers, so if you multiply their numbers by 1.2, and then calculate for each group, you find
Democrats CNN 44 MSNBC 32 FOX 23.5
Republicans CNN 27 MSNBC 30 FOX 43
Independents CNN 35 MSNBC 35 FOX 30