NPR vs. Fox News
Tom Enright
The Leal case also provides an interesting example of media bias.
Here's how NPR described the crime in a story last month:
On the night of May 21, 1994, 16-year-old Adria Sauceda attended a
party on the south side of San Antonio. Witnesses testified that the
teenager ingested so much alcohol, cocaine and marijuana she became
extremely intoxicated. A group of eight or nine young men took her
into the backyard and took turns sexually assaulting her. Anyone who
tried to intervene was told to back off.
Sandra Babcock, Leal's lawyer and a professor at Northwestern
University Law School, says when Leal arrived at the party and learned
what happened to Sauceda he "became very upset and said that he was
going to take her home."
Leal says that on the ride home, Sauceda tried to get out of the car.
Leal pulled over, she got out, he tried to get her back in, they
argued, he pushed her and she hit her head. But Leal maintains he
didn't kidnap her and he didn't rape her. And that's the crux of his
defense because without those additional crimes, Leal would not have
faced a capital murder charge and a death penalty conviction.
"So although there was evidence that he was with her before she died--
and that he may have had some involvement in her death--the evidence
that shows that he committed a sexual assault is reed thin, and the
evidence that shows that he kidnapped her is even weaker," Babcock
says.
FoxNews.com relies on official records in its description of the
crime:
Adria Sauceda, 16, his victim, was found naked by authorities,
according to court documents.
"There was a 30- to 40-pound asphalt rock roughly twice the size of
the victim's skull lying partially on the victim's left arm," court
documents read. "Blood was underneath this rock. A smaller rock with
blood on it was located near the victim's right thigh."
A "bloody and broken" stick roughly 15 inches long with a screw at the
end of it was also protruding from the girl's vagina, according to the
documents.
In his first statement to police, Leal said Sauceda bolted from his
car and ran off. After he was told his brother had given detectives a
statement, he changed his story, saying Sauceda attacked him and fell
to the ground after he fought back. He said when he couldn't wake her
and saw bubbles in her nose, he got scared and went home.
That's quite different from the story the defense lawyer successfully
peddled to NPR--and remember, the defendant was convicted.
---------------------------
-Tom Enright
PrinceGunter
> [snip]
NPR contacted the prosecutor and the defense, but did not get a
response from the prosecution.
Fox's story rested on court documents, but included only the
prosecution's side of the case.
Both are sloppy, but NPR did at least attempt to include both sides of
the story.
Tom Enright
Ah...court documents cover *BOTH* sides.
-Tom Enright
CtrlAltieDel
Reading NPR's account of the incident, I was left thinking that an
innocent and warm hearted individual who was trying to do good was
falsely accused of murder by the evil man.
Of course, I had to read Fox's account to learn that he battered her
skull in and stuck a 2x4 up her vagina and left her worse off than dead.
Hmmm, yeah, NPR really included both sides of the story.
What is wrong with Democrats?
Dennis J
for crying out loud. Who knows what's happened to his brain? Maybe
it's scrambled his molecules...
only if both sides have filed...
--
"It’s been so difficult to get out of this recession because of the disequilibrium in the real economy.”" -- Paul Volcker
"Education is the progressive discovery of our own Ignorance" Will Durant
"One can't have a sense of perspective without a sense of Humor" -- Wayne Thiboux
"the Glass is not only half full, it has been delicious so far!!" -- ME
To reply, SCRAPE off the end bits.
PrinceGunter
> On Jul 13, 4:17 pm, PrinceGunter <slippymississi...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > On Jul 13, 7:43 am, Tom Enright <freddy_ha...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > [snip]
>
>
No, the controversy surrounds the fact that the defendant did not
receive adequate representation at trial, which would have been
resolved had he contacted the Mexican embassy. So to get both sides
of the story, you need the facts as presented by the prosecution (Fox)
and the current defense lawyer's story (NPR). Both news agencies were
equally sloppy reporting this story, but NPR did at least call the
prosecutor seeking a statement. Fox, on the other hand, didn't even
bother to contact the defense attorney.
Dennis J
matter, for crying out loud. Who knows what's happened to his brain?
Maybe it's scrambled his molecules...
>On Jul 13, 3:23�pm, Tom Enright <freddy_ha...@yahoo.com> wrote:
we report, you decide!!!
xyzzy
If the defendant had adequate representation, yes. Oh wait.
Emperor Wonko the Sane
> On Jul 13, 3:23 pm, Tom Enright <freddy...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > On Jul 13, 4:17 pm, PrinceGunter <slippymi...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >
> > > On Jul 13, 7:43 am, Tom Enright <freddy...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >
> > > > [snip]
> >
> > Ah...court documents cover *BOTH* sides.
> >
>
> No, the controversy surrounds the fact that the defendant did not
> receive adequate representation at trial, which would have been
> resolved had he contacted the Mexican embassy. So to get both sides
> of the story, you need the facts as presented by the prosecution (Fox)
> and the current defense lawyer's story (NPR). Both news agencies were
> equally sloppy reporting this story, but NPR did at least call the
> prosecutor seeking a statement. Fox, on the other hand, didn't even
> bother to contact the defense attorney.
I thought the controversy was that he was never told he had the right to contact the Mexican consulate. I hadn't heard anything about adequacy of counsel.
Doug
xyzzy
wrote:
The idea being that the Mexican consulate could have helped arrange
adequate representation for him, duh. Like you would want an
American consulate to do for you if you were arrested for a capital
crime in a foreign country.
The Undead Edward M. Kennedy
>>> > > [snip]
>>>
>>> Ah...court documents cover *BOTH* sides.
>>>
>>
>>No, the controversy surrounds the fact that the defendant did not
>>receive adequate representation at trial, which would have been
>>resolved had he contacted the Mexican embassy. So to get both sides
>>of the story, you need the facts as presented by the prosecution (Fox)
>>and the current defense lawyer's story (NPR). Both news agencies were
>>equally sloppy reporting this story, but NPR did at least call the
>>prosecutor seeking a statement.
The facts of the case are public record and NPR either did not get
them or include them. I'm actually surprised to see NPR this sloppy
as they usually aren't, and I don't think it's systemic like Fox.
But in this case I don't have much against Fox, either.
>> Fox, on the other hand, didn't even
>>bother to contact the defense attorney.
>>
>>
> we report, you decide!!!
Fox probably should have at least reported the representation issue,
which or may not be true, but the dude was *convicted*. I see no
reason for Fox news to report the *new* defense attorney's story.
The only issue here is was he poorly defended or not. The facts
as determined by the trial do not need his cockmamie side of the
story as a valid opposing story.
Do we need to include Charles Manson's side of the story every
time he comes up for parole? I mean you at least need a shred of
evidence to go the "innocent convict" route. The guys story does
not count as a shred of evidence.
--Tedward
The Undead Edward M. Kennedy
> > > > On Jul 13, 7:43 am, Tom Enright <freddy...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > [snip]
>
> > > Ah...court documents cover *BOTH* sides.
>
> > No, the controversy surrounds the fact that the defendant did not
> > receive adequate representation at trial, which would have been
> > resolved had he contacted the Mexican embassy. So to get both sides
> > of the story, you need the facts as presented by the prosecution (Fox)
> > and the current defense lawyer's story (NPR). Both news agencies were
> > equally sloppy reporting this story, but NPR did at least call the
> > prosecutor seeking a statement. Fox, on the other hand, didn't even
> > bother to contact the defense attorney.
>
> I thought the controversy was that he was never told he had the right to contact the Mexican consulate. I hadn't heard anything
> about adequacy of counsel.
<
<The idea being that the Mexican consulate could have helped arrange
<adequate representation for him, duh.
Just remember that the fact that he did not contact the Mexican embassy
is not prima facie evidence that both A) he did not recive adequate defense,
and B) he would have had he contacted the embassy.
Only reporting on the defense's side of the case is laughable and I have
a feeling either a reporter and/or editor is going to be in hot water at NPR.
--Tedward
Emperor Wonko the Sane
> On Jul 13, 7:43 am, Tom Enright <freddy...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > [snip]
>
> NPR contacted the prosecutor and the defense, but did not get a
> response from the prosecution.
>
> Fox's story rested on court documents, but included only the
> prosecution's side of the case.
>
> Both are sloppy, but NPR did at least attempt to include both sides of
> the story.
This is more than a little disingenuous. I'm sure that the legal beagles on NPR's staff know full well that the prosecution is unlikely to talk to the press for fear of a claim that they are trying to prejudice the defendant's case, even well after the court's verdict. You never know when an appeal may stick and a new trial is ordered. NPR knew that the prosecutor was unlikely to respond. OTOH, the defense has every incentive to get his client's spin into whatever forum he/she can.
It's also disingenuous to accept the defendant's story when physical evidence that is on record contradicts his story.
Doug
Eric Ramon
>
> Hmmm, yeah, NPR really included both sides of the story.
>
> What is wrong with Democrats?
NPR doesn't = Democrats however thank you for accidentally admitting
that Fox = Republicans. As in "since Fox is Republican then NPR must
be Democratic". As in "Fox is Republican which isn't really fair and
balanced after all but fair and balanced is sort of funny since it's
so untrue and sticks it to Democrats".
Thomas R. Kettler
Dennis J <drju...@frontier.SCRAPE.COM> wrote:
> hey, PrinceGunter <slippymi...@yahoo.com>'s been through solid
> matter, for crying out loud. Who knows what's happened to his brain?
> Maybe it's scrambled his molecules...
>
> >On Jul 13, 3:23 pm, Tom Enright <freddy_ha...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >> On Jul 13, 4:17 pm, PrinceGunter <slippymississi...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> > On Jul 13, 7:43 am, Tom Enright <freddy_ha...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> > > [snip]
> >>
> >> Ah...court documents cover *BOTH* sides.
> >>
> >
> >No, the controversy surrounds the fact that the defendant did not
> >receive adequate representation at trial, which would have been
> >resolved had he contacted the Mexican embassy. So to get both sides
> >of the story, you need the facts as presented by the prosecution (Fox)
> >and the current defense lawyer's story (NPR). Both news agencies were
> >equally sloppy reporting this story, but NPR did at least call the
> >prosecutor seeking a statement. Fox, on the other hand, didn't even
> >bother to contact the defense attorney.
> >
> >
> we report, you decide!!!
Actually, it is Fox Skews: We Distort, It's Implied!
--
Remove blown from email address to reply.
Thomas R. Kettler
The Scottsboro Boys were convicted numerous times. The Tulia, Texas drug
cases resulted in convictions also. Being convicted doesn't make one
guilty.
Tom's Fifth Grade Diploma
It's that you Repellican necks can't stand real reporting because you're
usually trying to hide the facts and mislead people, or you're just a
dumbass stooges parrotting what you are told. You never bother to seek out
information for yourself because you've been brainwashed into believing that
any source that disagrees with your controllers is somehow tainted or
dishonest, or engaging in some nameless conspiracy. In your squinty beady
Repellican eyes, the more authoritative and educated the source, and the
deeper and more exhaustive the research, the more your righturd
hillbilliness breaks loose with another fit of anti-intellectualism. You
fuckers are so stupid that you actually admire stupid. And we all know you
can't fix stupid.
Now move along. Your boy tommy is looking for you in an airport bathroom...
Tom's Fifth Grade Diploma
You're never going to get tommy twit to wrap his little pea of a brain
around something like that. He's so stupid he forgets to breathe.
Tom's Fifth Grade Diploma
Yeah, you silly tinfoil-hat dumbass, and there are court documents for both
sides, and Fox reported what suited them and made zero effort to actually do
what is called "reporting" by real journalists. Of course you probably think
responsible reporting is always part of a nefarious secret conspiracy in
league with scientists, universities, and others who are obviously engaged
in global information control.
What a gullible bait-sucking little rightturd sycophant!
Tom's Fifth Grade Diploma
[shit]
You're just stupefyingly gullible, tommy, I bet you ate snacks from the cat
litter box when you were a kid. Maybe you still do.
Edwin Gooshapee
> On Wed, 13 Jul 2011 19:19:26 -0500, Ctrl¤/Alt¤/Del¤
> <Ctrl¤/Alt¤/Del¤®@Ctrl¤/Alt¤/Del¤®.net> wrote:
>
>> I never took you as being a dishonest person, ERIC, even though you are a
>> Democrat.
>
> My mistake.
Mr. Del: I have been on this newsgroup for but a short time after
stumbling upon it under the mistaken impression that it would discuss
soccer in the USA. However, I have found it to be most diverting and
droll. And I must confess that you truly divert and droll me more than
any other poster here. You would be a huge hit if you visited the
islands back home.
Edwin Gooshapee
> You can call me Altie; no need to be so formal and stand-offish.
>
Thanks for the friendly words, Altie. They are truly appreciated.
> We are all friends here and have a bond that someone from whatever
> impoverished island-nation you are from would not understand.
>
I am not from Haiti if that was what you were thinking. In fact, I
think I will just let you figure out which island-nation I am from -
there are clues aplenty!! Suffice it to say, that while we are not
wealthy, we are actually not that much less well off than people from
several American states.
> The bond is football. Football is an American sport that is very
> popular here, especially the variety that is played by college students.
>
So I surmise. During my stint in the US I tried to follow this game,
but it was all very confusing. And if quality is measured in terms of
size and speed, I much preferred the professional version of the game.
And as someone who admires people of all genders I found some of the
players quite - well, rousing...
> We may have our differences but, we don't really dislike each other that
> much.
>
"That much" you say? Tsk! Tsk! Tsk!
> If you believe that you are going to bring some kind of 3rd world hatred
> into the group and disrupt it, you are mistaken, sir.
>
Well, technically - the islands would probably be considered "third
world" I suppose. But I bring nothing but love to this newsgroup,
Altie. Only love.
> Try to be more polite and pretend that your parents weren't trash and
> that you have manners.
Holy cow! Now what exactly set this off, man? Please feel free to
point out where I was impolite.
And for the record, my first father was a lawyer and my second a doctor.
My mom - I have many differences with her - but she was a musician.
None of them would be classifiable as "trash" as you so delicately
phrase it.
Eric Ramon
¤®.net> wrote:
> On Wed, 13 Jul 2011 19:19:26 -0500, Ctrl¤/Alt¤/Del¤
>
> <Ctrl¤/Alt¤/Del¤®@Ctrl¤/Alt¤/Del¤®.net> wrote:
> >I never took you as being a dishonest person, ERIC, even though you are a
> >Democrat.
>
> My mistake.
from my vantage point NPR stands for nice polite Republicans. I can
understand from where you are that the NPR folks are screaming
Communists.
xyzzy
> "xyzzy" <xyzzy.d...@gmail.com> wrote
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > > > > On Jul 13, 7:43 am, Tom Enright <freddy...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > [snip]
>
> > > > Ah...court documents cover *BOTH* sides.
>
> > > No, the controversy surrounds the fact that the defendant did not
> > > receive adequate representation at trial, which would have been
> > > resolved had he contacted the Mexican embassy. So to get both sides
> > > of the story, you need the facts as presented by the prosecution (Fox)
> > > and the current defense lawyer's story (NPR). Both news agencies were
> > > equally sloppy reporting this story, but NPR did at least call the
> > > prosecutor seeking a statement. Fox, on the other hand, didn't even
> > > bother to contact the defense attorney.
>
> > I thought the controversy was that he was never told he had the right to contact the Mexican consulate. I hadn't heard anything
> > about adequacy of counsel.
>
> <
> <The idea being that the Mexican consulate could have helped arrange
> <adequate representation for him, duh.
>
> Just remember that the fact that he did not contact the Mexican embassy
> is not prima facie evidence that both A) he did not recive adequate defense,
> and B) he would have had he contacted the embassy.
That's beside the point. The U.S. is party to a consular relations
treaty that requires aliens arrested for serious crimes to have
access to their consulates. We violated that treaty. I guess we
won't complain when other countries do it to our citizens, like, say
Iran.
Who knows if the Mexican embassy could have got him better
representation. Maybe they could, maybe they couldn't. But since he
wasn't given access to them, then they were prevented from even
trying. If it wasn't a death penalty case, at least he could have a
chance to appeal later. In death penalty cases, you try to give the
defense more of a fighting chance. Well you do if you have any
humanity, anyway.
Tom's Fifth Grade Diploma
> mode and switches to Outlook Express to rage against the devils.
>
> Isn't it all kind of cowardly, in a way?
Like everything you Repugnicans say and do? Please.
>
> Anyway, back to reality.
Faux reality... snork. Rupert Murdoch's criminally discredited Faux reality.
Yeah, get on that bandwagon. Moron.
>NPR says that an angel swooped down to save
> this poor girl from a pack of misguided, yet still loved, gentlemen
> who were just happening to get their rape on.
They said nothing of the sort. See what I mean? And did you investigate this
stuff yourself or are you just parrotting the crap posted by your boi tommy?
>
> Someone, the angelic savior of the child lost his way home and let the
> girl out so as she could be home on time and not be punished by her
> parents for being late.
>
> Fox, being owned by the Koch Brothers, and only using Murdoch as a
> figurehead, flagrantly and dishonestly misrepresent the whole
> situation due to their hatred of all minorities.
Your tinfoil helmet is shorted out, freakshow. How's your idol Rupert doing?
Getting ready to take a header off a tall building, I hope?
>
> Shame on them for mentioning an alleged jagged stick with nails in it
> that somehow found it's way into this girl's vagina after she was
> gingerly and respectively released to her freedom by this gentleman.
Shame on them for not actually using reporters to investigate a story they
wanted to run like real journalists do, and allegedly clipping one side of
the report from a "court document".
>
> Who the fuck do they think they are having the audacity to include the
> fact that a boulder had been used to smash this girl's body with?
You mean why did they need to broadcast the most gory details to get
ratings? Nowhere did NPR suggest that he was innocent. True to your
rightturd stupidity, you fail to understand, even though it's here in
writing, that the issue was the execution without representation by
competent counsel. But I'm sure since Faux ran a sensationalistic story on
the gory details, you believe he's not entitled to a fair trial. Fair
enough?
>
> Fox are bastards that have been programmed by George W. Bush to
> perpetrate his lies.
Actually Dumbya was the one who was programmed. You can get a lot out of the
connected terminally stupid if you can suck them in to your game.
>
> So what if the gentleman's brother testified that his brother was the
> killer. The brother is probably a Republican that has been
> brainwashed by FauxNews.
So his brother was there? At the scene?
You're just so gullible and unable to grasp the point of a discussion at
all. It was about representation, not guilt or innocence. Maybe the evidence
made him look bad. But is he entitled to competent representation or not?
Like I said, if Faux turns it into some sensational garbage for the purpose
of titillating your need for disgusting gory details, then the suspect is
obviously guilty. Why not just summarily execute him and save the state some
money? I'm sure you agree with that sentiment, although your boi tommy will
probably be pissed about it.
And I can't wait to see how you rightturds jump to the defense of your
criminal leader, Rupert Murdoch and his band of cyber thugs.
Haaaaaaaaahahahaha! It's coming across the pond and it's going to take down
Rupert, Faux, and his entire US empire. Hopefully they will lock the bastard
and his henchmen up for life. You might as well start making up your
desperate hopeless defense now. I'm waiting...
Moron.
Tom's Fifth Grade Diploma
> Do you imagine that by blurting out such a falsehood as NPR not being
> wholly owned by the DNC that you are being somehow deviously cute and
> defiant?
The DNC owns NPR? Wow! You're even more gullible and brainwashed than your
airport bathroom buddy tommy!
Stupid rightturd.
lein
Oh, so this person from Mexico is an Alien and not some sort of
undocumented citizen?
He came to this country at 2 years of age and he's how old now? He
clearly knows or should know the laws of this country as he is clearly
not some Hispanic looking tourist who was asked by a jackbooted police
officer his immigration status on a whim.
Also, where did the U.S. deny him access to his consulate? It wasn't
brought up in his trial, was it? Did he even ask for a consulate?
lein
> hey, Tom Enright <freddy_ha...@yahoo.com>'s been through solid matter,
> for crying out loud. Who knows what's happened to his brain? Maybe
> it's scrambled his molecules...
>
> >> On Jul 13, 7:43 am, Tom Enright <freddy_ha...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >> > [snip]
>
> >> NPR contacted the prosecutor and the defense, but did not get a
> >> response from the prosecution.
>
> >> Fox's story rested on court documents, but included only the
> >> prosecution's side of the case.
>
> >> Both are sloppy, but NPR did at least attempt to include both sides of
> >> the story.
>
>
Didn't he stand trial?
The Undead Edward M. Kennedy
I already conceded your point. I'd just like a shred of evidence.
--Tedward
Emperor Wonko the Sane
> On Jul 13, 6:27 pm, Emperor Wonko the Sane <d....@sorensensdomain.net>
> wrote:
> > On Wednesday, July 13, 2011 4:49:08 PM UTC-5, PrinceGunter wrote:
> > > On Jul 13, 3:23 pm, Tom Enright <fred...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > > On Jul 13, 4:17 pm, PrinceGunter <slipp...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >
> > > > > On Jul 13, 7:43 am, Tom Enright <fred...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >
> > > > > > [snip]
> >
> > > > Ah...court documents cover *BOTH* sides.
> >
> > > No, the controversy surrounds the fact that the defendant did not
> > > receive adequate representation at trial, which would have been
> > > resolved had he contacted the Mexican embassy. So to get both sides
> > > of the story, you need the facts as presented by the prosecution (Fox)
> > > and the current defense lawyer's story (NPR). Both news agencies were
> > > equally sloppy reporting this story, but NPR did at least call the
> > > bother to contact the defense attorney.
> >
> >
>
> The idea being that the Mexican consulate could have helped arrange
> American consulate to do for you if you were arrested for a capital
> crime in a foreign country.
Um, American courts do that for every defendant, duh. The fact remains that he HAD adequate representation. There's nothing more that the country he left when he was two years old could have done for him, in this case.
Doug
Tom's Fifth Grade Diploma
Not even close, dimwit. You're apparently dying to discredit someone who's
been making a fool of you for years so you sling shit in his direction while
remaining totally clueless about the truth. Why don't you get your Rupert
Murdoch Faux News Hacker Criminal buddies to flush me out? You know, the
ones who further victimized the families of 9/11 victims? Your heros? Yeah,
those guys, your scumbag idols.
Everything you Repugnicans have dishonestly built through Murdoch's criminal
attempt to control public opinion and direct public policy is about to come
crashing down and crush your tiny little pin heads. Deal with it. They lie
distributor which you all count on to support your ingorant ranting and
contempt for American principles and ideals is dying, and it's going to be
ugly. Oh, so ugly.
The ensuing meltdown is going to be the best entertainment we've had in
years.
Haaaaaaaaaaaahahahahahaaaa!
Yeah, I'm "Huckie", yeah, right. Go on believing that, you mental dwarf. Why
are you here, anyway, . Don't you have some more American jobs to ship
overseas to your Pakistani pals?
**Wanna know who I am now that I've gotten your panties all up in a knot
again? I'm a guy who is sick and tired of arrogant self-absorbed assholes
like you overwhelming sports groups with your idiotic political bullshit.
I'm not here about the politics, I'm just here about pissing off asholes
like you and disrupting your moronic squatting in sports NGs. I come in here
looking for some topical football discussion and all I find is shit from
pestilent filth like you. You and your ass buddy tommy couldn't make an
intelligent post about college football if your life depended on it.
Now take your shit where it belongs and go away, you pathetic asshat.
Emperor Wonko the Sane
> PrinceGunter wrote:
> >> On Jul 13, 4:17 pm, PrinceGunter <slippymi...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> On Jul 13, 7:43 am, Tom Enright <freddy...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>>> [snip]
> >>
> >> Ah...court documents cover *BOTH* sides.
> >>
> >
> > No, the controversy surrounds the fact that the defendant did not
> > receive adequate representation at trial, which would have been
> > resolved had he contacted the Mexican embassy. So to get both sides
> > of the story, you need the facts as presented by the prosecution (Fox)
> > and the current defense lawyer's story (NPR). Both news agencies were
> > equally sloppy reporting this story, but NPR did at least call the
> > prosecutor seeking a statement. Fox, on the other hand, didn't even
> > bother to contact the defense attorney.
>
> You're never going to get tommy twit to wrap his little pea of a brain
> around something like that. He's so stupid he forgets to breathe.
Another irony meter vaporized.
Doug
The Undead Edward M. Kennedy
I think you're the one who's beside the point with regard to the issue
at hand (NPR vs. Fox News.). Yes, the treaty violation is an issue.
With regards to how the story should have been reported, Fox News
should have reported that, but other than that, they were spot on.
They even included Leal's story (which changed).
Meanwhile I think NPR fucked up big time.
--Tedward
The Undead Edward M. Kennedy
In terms of the treaty violation being a potential big issue in a general sense,
you are correct.
In terms of how the story was reported, it is a tiny issue.
Fox left out a detail that, while an omission, doesn't otherwise condemn their
reporting of the story. NPR doesn't seem to have a leg to stand on.
Welcome to Bizzaro's world.
--Tedward
"The Undead Edward M. Kennedy" <e...@o.com> wrote in message news:ivmu89$oas$2...@dont-email.me...
RaginPage
> - Show quoted text -
I am amazed and perplexed that *anyone* would defend NPR on this one.
Even to attack Fox News which I know is a favorite sport in this
country.
Brent
Tom Enright
wrote:
> **Wanna know who I am now that I've gotten your panties all up in a knot
> again? I'm a guy who is sick and tired of arrogant self-absorbed assholes
> like you overwhelming sports groups with your idiotic political bullshit.
> I'm not here about the politics, I'm just here about pissing off asholes
> like you and disrupting your moronic squatting in sports NGs. I come in here
> looking for some topical football discussion and all I find is shit from
> pestilent filth like you. You and your ass buddy tommy couldn't make an
> intelligent post about college football if your life depended on it.
>
> Now take your shit where it belongs and go away, you pathetic asshat.
Every so often, although it's been a while, some piece of Eurotrash
washes-up in our group and decides that he's going to join us.
Sometimes we pull them in from some other news group or he stumbles in
here on his own.
Generally it runs the same course:
1. The first sign is typically a correction of grammar, or more
excitingly, a 'correction' of American English.
2. Incorrectly applied American insults. Calling a person from
Georgia a "Yank" or someone from Kansas a "hillbilly."
3. Lots of babble about George W. Bush, the right-wing, Christians,
conservatives, global warming etc. Because all good, right-thinking
people believe that 9-11 was an 'inside job,' that the Guardian is
gospel and the ice caps will be completely melted by 1999…2002….2007….
2011…2059
So be assured that you are performing your duties brilliantly. Some
of your previous countrymen held back a bit longer before going
completely out of their hopelessly inbred brains and started barking
at the moon. You are ahead of schedule.
-Tom Enright
Jaybyrd
> http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142405270230336580457643391087728...
>
> The Leal case also provides an interesting example of media bias.
> Here's how NPR described the crime in a story last month:
>
> On the night of May 21, 1994, 16-year-old Adria Sauceda attended a
> party on the south side of San Antonio. Witnesses testified that the
> teenager ingested so much alcohol, cocaine and marijuana she became
> extremely intoxicated. A group of eight or nine young men took her
> into the backyard and took turns sexually assaulting her. Anyone who
> tried to intervene was told to back off.
>
> Sandra Babcock, Leal's lawyer and a professor at Northwestern
> University Law School, says when Leal arrived at the party and learned
> what happened to Sauceda he "became very upset and said that he was
> going to take her home."
>
> Leal says that on the ride home, Sauceda tried to get out of the car.
> Leal pulled over, she got out, he tried to get her back in, they
> argued, he pushed her and she hit her head. But Leal maintains he
> didn't kidnap her and he didn't rape her. And that's the crux of his
> defense because without those additional crimes, Leal would not have
> faced a capital murder charge and a death penalty conviction.
>
> "So although there was evidence that he was with her before she died--
> and that he may have had some involvement in her death--the evidence
> that shows that he committed a sexual assault is reed thin, and the
> evidence that shows that he kidnapped her is even weaker," Babcock
> says.
>
> FoxNews.com relies on official records in its description of the
> crime:
>
> Adria Sauceda, 16, his victim, was found naked by authorities,
> according to court documents.
> "There was a 30- to 40-pound asphalt rock roughly twice the size of
> the victim's skull lying partially on the victim's left arm," court
> documents read. "Blood was underneath this rock. A smaller rock with
> blood on it was located near the victim's right thigh."
>
> A "bloody and broken" stick roughly 15 inches long with a screw at the
> end of it was also protruding from the girl's vagina, according to the
> documents.
>
> In his first statement to police, Leal said Sauceda bolted from his
> car and ran off. After he was told his brother had given detectives a
> statement, he changed his story, saying Sauceda attacked him and fell
> to the ground after he fought back. He said when he couldn't wake her
> and saw bubbles in her nose, he got scared and went home.
> That's quite different from the story the defense lawyer successfully
> peddled to NPR--and remember, the defendant was convicted.
>
> ---------------------------
>
> -Tom Enright
I'm seeing differences of opinion here about this "great bias
controversy" for this particular case but all I have to do is turn on
Fox news at any given moment to see reactionary right wing propaganda.
You're trying to compare a candle to a flame thrower here.
RaginPage
>
> - Show quoted text -
That all has to do with where *you* are at politically.
NPR seems pretty biased, all the time, if you are right of center,
just as Fox seems that way if you are left of center.
Consider the following, and this is a comparison with MSNBC, not NPR:
MSNBC was having a piece on the Wisconsin battle over unions and they
had Andy Stern as a guest and said to him "You don't really have a dog
in this fight, but what do you see here?" The same Andy Stern that
was the head of the unions.
OTOH, just today, Fox introduced a guest as part of a "bi-partisan
commission" and I have to admit I tuned out enough that I didn't hear
the rest of it, and he continuously referred to the Dems and their
positions as "we" as he blasted the Republicans.
I know Fox at times has been pretty bad about blasting their "guests"
and not letting them talk, but that would never have happend on MSNBC
in the other direction and probably not NPR either.
So it really depends on where you stand as to how much slant these
different entities have.
Brent
xyzzy
It probably wouldn't happen on MSNBC because even if invited I doubt
any conservative would agree to go on.
It happens on NPR all the time, and the fact that you think it
probably never would just tells me that you don't listen to NPR.
Which is fine, as long as you don't then claim to know how they would
cover an issue.
RaginPage
>
> - Show quoted text -
You totally missed the point. NPR would not introduce someone as
"bipartisan" and then let them speak in a completely partisan fashion
without calling them on it.
I know NPR has people from both sides on there, or from bi-partisan or
nonpartisan organizations.
Brent
xyzzy
OK, you're right I did miss your point.
Jaybyrd
I thought I posted this already but it didn't seem to come up. NPR
is like a tiny flame of "liberal bias" compared to the Hydrogen bomb
of "reactionary bias" that Fox spews. The degree of profound Fox-ism
propaganda is so far to the extreme that it can't be denied.
Jaybyrd
I totally disagree. It's about how far to the extreme Fox is compared
to NPR. There's no comparison at all. My analogy of a candle to a
flamethrower should probably be changed to the candle of NPR to the
Hydrogen bomb of Fox news.
RaginPage
>
> - Show quoted text -
I know this has been covered on here before, but it isn't that cut and
dry, or simple.
When it comes to annoying, editorial comments by every supposed
newsperson, there is no question that Fox has everyone beat.
When it comes to interrupting and shouting down supposed "guests", I
think Fox has everyone beat, though MSNBC and CNN have really come up
in the ranks over the last year or so.
However, when it comes to the "meat" of the news story, when it is
actually a news story, Fox tends to have the more balanced reporting
over every news source on TV, including the Big 3, including a very
meticulous effort to make sure on controversial stories that both
sides are supported and reported.
NPR doesn't do this, CNN doesn't do this and NBC doesn't do this on
any regular basis.
I think a lot of people tend to think because someone can sound
unemotional and boring that the reporting is necessarily full of
journalistic integrity. Not exactly.
*When* CNN does it right, *when* NPR does it right, *when* NBC does it
right, I will take that story ANY day over ANY story from Fox News.
But Fox News covers its bases more often than any of those.
Unfortunately, you have to get through the editorializing to get to
the meat, which is why I wish someone would just do it right on a
consistent basis.
Both NPR and CNN get caught up too often in stories that are put out
there on purpose, much like the New York Times.
They need better investigating.
Brent
Tom's Fifth Grade Diploma
Haw haw haw.... that's rich, you stupid cracker neck.
Bzzzt. FAIL.
Thanks for playing.
RaginPage
>
> - Show quoted text -
Not even close, the other way around. NPR's claim to balanced
reporting was an attack on Obama.... from the left.
please.
Brent
Tom's Fifth Grade Diploma
>>>
>>> So be assured that you are performing your duties brilliantly. Some
>>> of your previous countrymen held back a bit longer before going
>>> completely out of their hopelessly inbred brains and started barking
>>> at the moon. You are ahead of schedule.
>>>
>>> -Tom Enright
>>
>> Haw haw haw.... that's rich, you stupid cracker neck.
>>
>> Bzzzt. FAIL.
>>
>> Thanks for playing.
>
>
> strategy and realize that this is actually Huck pretending to be
> EuroTrash in order to add another layer of intrigue to his amazing
> failure.
>
> It's a real show at this point. It's fun.
Fun for me. You're such a tool!
Shift your strategy indeed. In other words, try to figure out some other way
to rationalize the obvious fact that you can't figure it out and simply
cannot let your little pea brain wrap itself around the fact that I am a new
poster here, not one of the left leaning folks who intellectually beat you
bloody on a daily basis.
Like I said, tool.
Edwin Gooshapee
> On Wed, 13 Jul 2011 21:49:49 -0400, Edwin Gooshapee
> <edw...@verizon.net> wrote:
>
>> Holy cow! Now what exactly set this off, man? Please feel free to
>> point out where I was impolite.
>
>
> Here you go:
>
> ivdhdm$5v1$1...@dont-email.me
>
What the HELL is this?
> you two-faced typical Democrat.
>
For the record, I'm not a US citizen so I can't be a Democrat (or a
Republican, for that matter).
> Gophesee wrote:
>
> "Dude - from what little I've seen you strike me as a bit of an ass.
> Actually, quite a supreme ass..."
>
OK - I apologize. Very sincerely.
This was WELL before you befriended me and said that I could call you by
your middle name. Regardless of my political views, I would never,
NEVER be that rude to someone who wishes to be friendly with me -
irrespective of how I viewed said person's political views.
Edwin Gooshapee
> On Wed, 13 Jul 2011 21:49:49 -0400, Edwin Gooshapee
> <edw...@verizon.net> wrote:
>
>> Ctrl¤/Alt¤/Del¤ oovac:
>>
>>> On Wed, 13 Jul 2011 21:21:55 -0400, Edwin Gooshapee
>>> <edw...@verizon.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Ctrl¤/Alt¤/Del¤ oovac:
>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, 13 Jul 2011 19:19:26 -0500, Ctrl¤/Alt¤/Del¤
>>>>> <Ctrl¤/Alt¤/Del¤®@Ctrl¤/Alt¤/Del¤®.net> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I never took you as being a dishonest person, ERIC, even though you are a
>>>>>> Democrat.
>>>>>
>>>>> My mistake.
>>>>
>>>> Mr. Del: I have been on this newsgroup for but a short time after
>>>> stumbling upon it under the mistaken impression that it would discuss
>>>> soccer in the USA. However, I have found it to be most diverting and
>>>> droll. And I must confess that you truly divert and droll me more than
>>>> any other poster here. You would be a huge hit if you visited the
>>>> islands back home.
>>>
>>> You can call me Altie; no need to be so formal and stand-offish.
>>>
>>
>> Thanks for the friendly words, Altie. They are truly appreciated.
>
> You are welcome, islander from some mysterious and exotic patch of land
> close to water.
>
Thank you. And my home is neither exotic nor mysterious. Au contraire,
we get shitloads of obnoxious tourists.
>>
>>> We are all friends here and have a bond that someone from whatever
>>> impoverished island-nation you are from would not understand.
>>>
>>
>> I am not from Haiti if that was what you were thinking.
>
> Haiti? Why would you pick that one island out and assume that I was
> referencing it? Seems presumptuous to me.
>
Not at all, Altie. It's the only "impoverished island-nation" close to
the US and A that readily came to mind.
>> In fact, I
>> think I will just let you figure out which island-nation I am from -
>> there are clues aplenty!!
>
> I think I will just let you keep imagining, for some very odd reason,
> that I truly care.
>
Not at all, Altie. Not at all. You are under NO obligation to do so -
none whatsoever.
>> Suffice it to say, that while we are not
>> wealthy, we are actually not that much less well off than people from
>> several American states.
>
> Enough with the racism.
>
Now, this puzzles me greatly. Why would you accuse me of racism???
>>
>>> The bond is football. Football is an American sport that is very
>>> popular here, especially the variety that is played by college students.
>>>
>>
>> So I surmise. During my stint in the US I tried to follow this game,
>> but it was all very confusing.
>
> Did you graduate whatever they call high school in the land of
> mysterious and exotic locales that you hail from? Football is rather
> simple to catch on to.
>
I actually have an undergraduate degree from a university in the "exotic
locale" from which I hail - one that actually enabled me to get into and
obtain two degrees from a very good graduate program at a university in
the US and A.
> Have ball, run across grass or turf and cross line to score points. It's
> not nearly as complicated as the game of soccer that they play in the
> backward nations of Europe and Africa and South America.
>
My island is not in any of these locales...
>
>> And if quality is measured in terms of
>> size and speed, I much preferred the professional version of the game.
>> And as someone who admires people of all genders I found some of the
>> players quite - well, rousing...
>
> If you like the penis, that is of little concern to me. But, like most
> penis lovers, you do feel a need to express your love of penis. I
> understand. It gives you a certain rebel like feeling of not being just
> the usual vagina loving male that has become so passe.
>
Wow! Is there any particular need to be this crude?
>>
>>> We may have our differences but, we don't really dislike each other that
>>> much.
>>>
>>
>> "That much" you say? Tsk! Tsk! Tsk!
>
> Do I dislike people with handicaps? Of course not. Do I personally
> have a vendetta against liberals like they do against conservatives? No
> way.
>
> Life is too short for that nonsense. I can teach you how to be a better
> person, Gophee, if you will only allow it.
>
I allow it. No - in fact, I welcome it with open arms. Kindly
enlighten us members of the great unwashed.
>>
>>> If you believe that you are going to bring some kind of 3rd world hatred
>>> into the group and disrupt it, you are mistaken, sir.
>>>
>>
>> Well, technically - the islands would probably be considered "third
>> world" I suppose. But I bring nothing but love to this newsgroup,
>> Altie. Only love.
>
> I'm not sensing it. You seem driven by some sort of misguided sarcasm
> that you substitute for genuine conversation.
>
I am pained. Truly pained.
>>
>>> Try to be more polite and pretend that your parents weren't trash and
>>> that you have manners.
>>
>> Holy cow! Now what exactly set this off, man? Please feel free to
>> point out where I was impolite.
>
> Holy cow? That sounds like an American expression. Are you from one of
> the islands off the coast of Georgia, USA?
>
Since you ask, no. I will say though that during my time in the US and
A, Georgia was my second least favorite state.
>>
>> And for the record, my first father was a lawyer and my second a doctor.
>> My mom - I have many differences with her - but she was a musician.
>> None of them would be classifiable as "trash" as you so delicately
>> phrase it.
>
> Wow. Musicians aren't trash? Next thing you will be saying is that
> actors aren't trash. LOL. Then you will clearly identified as a kook.
I have no idea what this means - please feel free to elaborate.
Edwin Gooshapee
> On Thu, 14 Jul 2011 21:54:35 -0400, Edwin Gooshapee
> <edw...@verizon.net> wrote:
>
>> Ctrl¤/Alt¤/Del¤ oovac:
>>
>>> On Wed, 13 Jul 2011 21:49:49 -0400, Edwin Gooshapee
>>> <edw...@verizon.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Holy cow! Now what exactly set this off, man? Please feel free to
>>>> point out where I was impolite.
>>>
>>>
>>> Here you go:
>>>
>>> ivdhdm$5v1$1...@dont-email.me
>>>
>>
>> What the HELL is this?
>
> Thanks called a message-id link, Gooshapee.
Hmmm - parse that for me please.
> If you were using a news
> reader that was made for adults, you would be able to follow that link
> to the thread were you were horribly mean to mean.
>
Hmmm - parse that for me please.
>>
>>> you two-faced typical Democrat.
>>>
>>
>> For the record, I'm not a US citizen so I can't be a Democrat (or a
>> Republican, for that matter).
>>
>>> Gophesee wrote:
>>>
>>> "Dude - from what little I've seen you strike me as a bit of an ass.
>>> Actually, quite a supreme ass..."
>>>
>>
>> OK - I apologize. Very sincerely.
>>
>> This was WELL before you befriended me and said that I could call you by
>> your middle name. Regardless of my political views, I would never,
>> NEVER be that rude to someone who wishes to be friendly with me -
>> irrespective of how I viewed said person's political views.
>
> I think you were very hateful and it wasn't called for. I do accept
> your apology though and hope you have learned a valuable lesson.
Thanks for accepting my apology. It is very gracious of you. Not sure
what the lesson was though - anyway, I hope we can be friends in the
future, Altie.
Edwin Gooshapee
> On Thu, 14 Jul 2011 22:07:15 -0400, Edwin Gooshapee
> Why do you dislike Mexicans? They like to travel also.
>
I'm not certain how you made this leap in logic. I have nothing against
Mexicans, and they form a fairly tiny proportion of the obnoxious
tourists who infest my home town.
>>>>
>>>>> We are all friends here and have a bond that someone from whatever
>>>>> impoverished island-nation you are from would not understand.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I am not from Haiti if that was what you were thinking.
>>>
>>> Haiti? Why would you pick that one island out and assume that I was
>>> referencing it? Seems presumptuous to me.
>>>
>>
>> Not at all, Altie. It's the only "impoverished island-nation" close to
>> the US and A that readily came to mind.
>
> Never heard of Cuba where only the tourists and extremely rich and
> government employees are allowed proper medical care? Come on.
>
Excellent point, Altie. I have not been to Cuba or to Haiti, but yes -
I could well have said "Cuba."
>>
>>>> In fact, I
>>>> think I will just let you figure out which island-nation I am from -
>>>> there are clues aplenty!!
>>>
>>> I think I will just let you keep imagining, for some very odd reason,
>>> that I truly care.
>>>
>>
>> Not at all, Altie. Not at all. You are under NO obligation to do so -
>> none whatsoever.
>
> Great, because I really don't care. I thank you immensely for your
> understanding.
>
Please, Altie! Is there cause to be sarcastic? I mean you accused me
of sarcasm - but come on. If this isn't sarcasm, I don't know what is.
If you had NO interest in my origins I would most certainly not be
offended. After all, would YOU care whether I thought you were from
Alabama or Arizona or Mississippi or Massachusetts?
>>
>>
>>>> Suffice it to say, that while we are not
>>>> wealthy, we are actually not that much less well off than people from
>>>> several American states.
>>>
>>> Enough with the racism.
>>>
>>
>> Now, this puzzles me greatly. Why would you accuse me of racism???
>
> Are you a racist? Just answer the question.
>
Since you ask, Altie - no, I don't believe I am. I will admit though,
that during my days in the US and A, I found Americans from certain
parts of the country to be MUCH more objectionable than those from other
parts. But it had nothing to do with race or skin color.
>>
>>>>
>>>>> The bond is football. Football is an American sport that is very
>>>>> popular here, especially the variety that is played by college students.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> So I surmise. During my stint in the US I tried to follow this game,
>>>> but it was all very confusing.
>>>
>>> Did you graduate whatever they call high school in the land of
>>> mysterious and exotic locales that you hail from? Football is rather
>>> simple to catch on to.
>>>
>>
>> I actually have an undergraduate degree from a university in the "exotic
>> locale" from which I hail - one that actually enabled me to get into and
>> obtain two degrees from a very good graduate program at a university in
>> the US and A.
>
> Yet you just couldn't quite understand a game that is infinitely less
> complicated than soccer? That doesn't exactly say much for your
> extremely high level of secondary education.
>
That would of course, be a matter of opinion. I am fairly sure though
that 99 out of 100 people would say that the rules of soccer are
infinitely simpler than those of American football.
>>
>>> Have ball, run across grass or turf and cross line to score points. It's
>>> not nearly as complicated as the game of soccer that they play in the
>>> backward nations of Europe and Africa and South America.
>>>
>>
>> My island is not in any of these locales...
>
> Oh, are you still under the impression that I am actually trying to
> figure out where you hail from? Give it a rest.
>
As one of your (admittedly less intelligent...) presidents once said
"There you go again!"
>>
>>>
>>>> And if quality is measured in terms of
>>>> size and speed, I much preferred the professional version of the game.
>>>> And as someone who admires people of all genders I found some of the
>>>> players quite - well, rousing...
>>>
>>> If you like the penis, that is of little concern to me. But, like most
>>> penis lovers, you do feel a need to express your love of penis. I
>>> understand. It gives you a certain rebel like feeling of not being just
>>> the usual vagina loving male that has become so passe.
>>>
>>
>> Wow! Is there any particular need to be this crude?
>
> Crude? You mention how you admire all genders of people and find NFL
> football players to be rousing. I merely follow your line of reasoning
> to it's logical end and you call me crude.
>
I merely referred to the fact that I phrased my sexual proclivities very
delicately, while you seem quite crude - if not downright bigoted - in
your response.
> You are being hateful again. Let's try to keep it civil and not have
> our discussion degenerate into some kind of Englandistanian pissing
> match. That would be depressing.
Again, you lost me. Unlike what you seem to be insinuating, I have
absolutely NO connection with England. And I want to know what was
"hateful" about my response.
>>
>>>>
>>>>> We may have our differences but, we don't really dislike each other that
>>>>> much.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "That much" you say? Tsk! Tsk! Tsk!
>>>
>>> Do I dislike people with handicaps? Of course not. Do I personally
>>> have a vendetta against liberals like they do against conservatives? No
>>> way.
>>>
>>> Life is too short for that nonsense. I can teach you how to be a better
>>> person, Gophee, if you will only allow it.
>>>
>>
>> I allow it. No - in fact, I welcome it with open arms. Kindly
>> enlighten us members of the great unwashed.
>
> Us? I was only communicating with you, Gooshappe. Let's just keep this
> between you and I and not hypothetical people that you wish to include.
>
Excellent! I wholeheartedly concur.
>>
>>>>
>>>>> If you believe that you are going to bring some kind of 3rd world hatred
>>>>> into the group and disrupt it, you are mistaken, sir.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Well, technically - the islands would probably be considered "third
>>>> world" I suppose. But I bring nothing but love to this newsgroup,
>>>> Altie. Only love.
>>>
>>> I'm not sensing it. You seem driven by some sort of misguided sarcasm
>>> that you substitute for genuine conversation.
>>>
>>
>>
>> I am pained. Truly pained.
>
>
> See what I mean by misguided sarcasm? Just calm down and stop being so
> defensive. I am not against you, friend.
>
Irony and sarcasm are very different, my friend Altie.
>>
>>>>
>>>>> Try to be more polite and pretend that your parents weren't trash and
>>>>> that you have manners.
>>>>
>>>> Holy cow! Now what exactly set this off, man? Please feel free to
>>>> point out where I was impolite.
>>>
>>> Holy cow? That sounds like an American expression. Are you from one of
>>> the islands off the coast of Georgia, USA?
>>>
>>
>>
>> Since you ask, no. I will say though that during my time in the US and
>> A, Georgia was my second least favorite state.
>
> I bet California or New York was the most disliked. Am I right?
>
Actually, no. I suspect you are being sarcastic - as seems to be your
wont - but I was thinking of another state. One that is just as
obsessed with American football as is Georgia.
>>
>>>>
>>>> And for the record, my first father was a lawyer and my second a doctor.
>>>> My mom - I have many differences with her - but she was a musician.
>>>> None of them would be classifiable as "trash" as you so delicately
>>>> phrase it.
>>>
>>> Wow. Musicians aren't trash? Next thing you will be saying is that
>>> actors aren't trash. LOL. Then you will clearly identified as a kook.
>>
>> I have no idea what this means - please feel free to elaborate.
>
> To have multiple degrees from the most highly celebrated and respected
> universities in this nation and some backwater island nation, you sure
> don't seem to know much.
>
Oh, I wouldn't go THAT far. My undergraduate degree is from the best
university on my island (well, the only university on my island). But
the US university I attended is good - but certainly not the "most
high;y celebrated and respected" one in the US. They DO have a very
creditable football program though.
> Actors were the bottom of the barrel as far as humanity was concerned
> for many, many years here in the United States. They were viewed, quite
> rightly, as human vermin and misfits.
>
> They were viewed very similarly to how one views murderers or bums or
> circus folk in our time. And, frankly, if you look at their actions
> today, they haven't really changed that much at all.
>
> Musicians were actually a small step above actors; can you believe that?
>
> To brag that you are the spawn of actors is to brag that you come from
> lowlifes and malcontents.
Please go back anbd re-read what I said. It's actor - singular - not
actorS. And please do not insult my mother - she might have been an
actor (and someone with whom I had differences of opinion) but she was
neither a lowlife nor a malcontent. I take GREAT umbrage at your
attempts to insult - especially after your pious protestations leading
in to this.
In fact Altie, as I get to the end of this post I have decided to
completely disengage from any further conversations with you. Your
goals seems to be to insult my mama - and I do NOT take kindly to that.
Jaybyrd
I've sited numerous examples in this newsgroup that show you're wrong
and I'm right. Many many others outside of RSFC are in agreement
about FOX. When you get a bunch of ultra conservatives together they
say "no" but that's pretty much the lunatic fringe talking.
Jaybyrd
it actually is pretty simple when FOX is concerned. They're way off
the scale. They're "mainstream" super ultra right wing propaganda.
Very simple and plain to see.
RaginPage
>
> - Show quoted text -
All I've seen cited on here are examples of little snarky partisan
swipes. However, nothing that shows the entire news story to be
slanted. You simply can't say the same for the other networks.
Fox has a right bend to it, there is no question of that, their entire
lineup of commentary is from the right. No one is denying that.
The news, on the other hand, has also been cited on here by a
comprehensive study to be the most balanced of the entire group of
networks.
If you can't differentiate the two, I suppose you deserve to be lied
to by your news network of choice.
Brent
Tom's Fifth Grade Diploma
> On Thu, 14 Jul 2011 19:46:20 -0500, "Tom's Fifth Grade Diploma"
> paragraphs. I like wallowing in your insanity; call me crazy.
I can't right now, tool boi. I'm late for a meeting at The Hague.
I haven't looked but I bet if you went and got a brain transplant you'd be
smart enough to do some simple word and style comparison with this Huck
fellow and figure out how much of an idiot you are making of yourself. But
then you have no hope of ciphering me out, so I guess you have to cling to
something to stay tethered to your version of reality. At least after I'm
gone I'll have the comfort of knowing I have made your little non-sports
fest less comfortable by massaging your relationship with your pal Huck.
Keep on responding to my every message though, I'm not tired of you yet.
Jaybyrd
non sequitur. enright is trying to lump NPR in as being the bad
liberal bias and so saying that FOX is a reasonable offset. Try to
put out a house fire with a water pistol
Thomas R. Kettler
Ctrl�/Alt�/Del� <Ctrl�/Alt�/Del��@Ctrl�/Alt�/Del��.net> wrote:
> Fox News is not conservative leaning at all and never has been. You are
> crazy.
I agree with you. Fox Skews doesn't lean conservative because they went
so far that way that the chair completely tipped over.
--
Remove blown from email address to reply.
Jaybyrd
Del .net> wrote:
> On Fri, 15 Jul 2011 04:07:22 -0700 (PDT), Jaybyrd
> lying, say that MSNBC, CNN, NBC, etc.. are not liberal at all.
>
> Fox News is not conservative leaning at all and never has been. You are
> crazy.
>
> arrogant, I am saying that Fox News is not and never has been
> conservative.
go play kid, the grownups are talkin
Thomas R. Kettler
Ctrl¤/Alt¤/Del¤ <Ctrl¤/Alt¤/Del¤®@Ctrl¤/Alt¤/Del¤®.net> wrote:
> On Fri, 15 Jul 2011 21:43:18 -0400, "Thomas R. Kettler"
> <tket...@blownfuse.net> wrote:
>
> >In article <nio127l0ht2c3ibfu...@4ax.com>,
> > Ctrl¤/Alt¤/Del¤ <Ctrl¤/Alt¤/Del¤®@Ctrl¤/Alt¤/Del¤®.net> wrote:
> >
> >> Fox News is not conservative leaning at all and never has been. You are
> >> crazy.
> >
> >I agree with you. Fox Skews doesn't lean conservative because they went
> >so far that way that the chair completely tipped over.
>
> You are incorrect. Fox News reports the news and that's it. They
> aren't conservative or liberal.
It's owned by Rupert Murdoch. When will we find that Fox Skews hires
people to hack cell phones of people they don't like?
Dennis J
crying out loud. Who knows what's happened to his brain? Maybe it's
scrambled his molecules...
the trouble is that "THE NEWS" on fox news is like MTV and MUSIC. a
couple of golden nuggets hidden in a pile of peach pits. Fox and
friends is 50% fluff 30% propaganda and 10% news and 10% humor.
Shep Smith's show is pretty decent, it still has a definite skew after
the quarter hour mark though. the rest is Opinion/how people should
think.
--
"It’s been so difficult to get out of this recession because of the disequilibrium in the real economy.”" -- Paul Volcker
"Education is the progressive discovery of our own Ignorance" Will Durant
"One can't have a sense of perspective without a sense of Humor" -- Wayne Thiboux
"the Glass is not only half full, it has been delicious so far!!" -- ME
To reply, SCRAPE off the end bits.
Dennis J
crying out loud. Who knows what's happened to his brain? Maybe it's
scrambled his molecules...
>> I thought I posted this already but it didn't seem to come up. � NPR
>> is like a tiny flame of "liberal bias" compared to the Hydrogen bomb
>> of "reactionary bias" that Fox spews. � The degree of profound Fox-ism
>> propaganda is so far to the extreme that it can't be denied.- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
everyone needs better investigation. I prefer hearing the BBC on world
events to most news outlets. Thier coverage so far has been excellent
WRT News International's problems. Fox news has been when I've seen
it recently, seems to be trying to just point fingers at the british
while glossing over the fact that many of the news International vets
are working in New York and Washington for Fox News.
Tom's Fifth Grade Diploma
>>>
>>> You have really went off the deep end, Huck. Write me a few more
>>> paragraphs. I like wallowing in your insanity; call me crazy.
>>
>> I can't right now, tool boi. I'm late for a meeting at The Hague.
>>
>> I haven't looked but I bet if you went and got a brain transplant
>> you'd be smart enough to do some simple word and style comparison
>> with this Huck fellow and figure out how much of an idiot you are
>> making of yourself. But then you have no hope of ciphering me out,
>> so I guess you have to cling to something to stay tethered to your
>> version of reality. At least after I'm gone I'll have the comfort of
>> knowing I have made your little non-sports fest less comfortable by
>> massaging your relationship with your pal Huck.
>>
>> Keep on responding to my every message though, I'm not tired of you
>> yet.
>
>
> kookery but, it was a long paragraph and fairly enjoyable.
I know you're jealous since you can't formulate more than five words at a
stretch and have them make sense, rightturd. I can write an entire treatise
before you could manage one side of standard paper, double spaced.