Math is a tool of the Liberal Media

0 views
Skip to first unread message

Paul Ciszek

unread,
Nov 24, 2009, 2:52:21 AM11/24/09
to

http://wonkette.com/412361/all-193-of-republicans-support-palin-romney-and-huckabee

--
Please reply to: | "Any sufficiently advanced incompetence is
pciszek at panix dot com | indistinguishable from malice."
Autoreply is disabled |

Peter Boulding

unread,
Nov 24, 2009, 6:38:50 AM11/24/09
to
On Tue, 24 Nov 2009 07:52:21 +0000 (UTC), nos...@nospam.com (Paul Ciszek)
wrote in <heg3bl$eqa$1...@reader1.panix.com>:

>http://wonkette.com/412361/all-193-of-republicans-support-palin-romney-and-huckabee

That wonderful graphic follows hard on the heels of Fox being caught
red-handed using old campaign footage to inflate the apparent attendance at
(a) a tea party protest and (b) a Sarah Palin book signing event, and which
resulted in the following memo from Fox News management:

] Effective immediately, there is zero tolerance for on-screen errors.
] Mistakes by any member of the show team that end up on air may result in
] immediate disciplinary action against those who played significant roles
] in the �mistake chain,� and those who supervise them. That may include
] warning letters to personnel files, suspensions, and other possible
] actions up to and including termination, and this will all obviously play
] a role in performance reviews. So we now face a great opportunity to
] review and improve on our workflow and quality control efforts. To make
] the most of that opportunity, effective immediately, Newsroom is going to
] �zero base� our newscast production. That means we will start by going to
] air with only the most essential, basic, and manageable elements. To share
] a key quote from today's meeting: "It is more important to get it right,
] than it is to get it on." We may then build up again slowly as deadlines
] and workloads allow so that we can be sure we can quality check everything
] before it makes air, and we never having to explain, retract, qualify or
] apologize again. Please know that jobs are on the line here. I can not
] stress that enough.

<http://thinkprogress.org/2009/11/23/fox-news-memo/>

--
Regards, Peter Boulding
pjbn...@UNSPAMpboulding.co.uk (to e-mail, remove "UNSPAM")
Fractal Music and Images: http://www.pboulding.co.uk/ and
http://www.soundclick.com/bands/default.cfm?bandID=794240&content=music

QueBarbara

unread,
Nov 24, 2009, 11:01:01 AM11/24/09
to

I wonder if it makes a difference that it happened not on the main Fox
News, but a local (Chicago) Fox station.

--
QueBarbara

Lee

unread,
Nov 24, 2009, 12:37:38 PM11/24/09
to
On Nov 24, 2:52 am, nos...@nospam.com (Paul Ciszek) wrote:
> http://wonkette.com/412361/all-193-of-republicans-support-palin-romne...
>
> --


I always thought math was a tool of baseball teams, except in the case
of outfielders' arm strength or base-running efficiency. But I read on
cnet that they're working on digital cameras that will enable them to
quanitfy even more off the wall stats.

David Friedman

unread,
Nov 24, 2009, 1:46:37 PM11/24/09
to
In article <heg3bl$eqa$1...@reader1.panix.com>,
nos...@nospam.com (Paul Ciszek) wrote:

> http://wonkette.com/412361/all-193-of-republicans-support-palin-romney-and-huc
> kabee

It's a confusing way of preventing the information, but without the
accompanying audio it isn't clear whether it's wrong. "Back" might mean
"think would be a good candidate" or something similar, in which case
one can back more than one candidate.

Consider the parallel of "backing" a horse--i.e. betting on it. One can
back more than one.

--
http://www.daviddfriedman.com/ http://daviddfriedman.blogspot.com/
Author of
_Future Imperfect: Technology and Freedom in an Uncertain World_,
Cambridge University Press.

Shawn Wilson

unread,
Nov 24, 2009, 2:19:45 PM11/24/09
to
On Nov 24, 4:38 am, Peter Boulding <pjbne...@UNSPAMpboulding.co.uk>
wrote:

> That wonderful graphic follows hard on the heels of Fox being caught
> red-handed using old campaign footage to inflate the apparent attendance at
> (a) a tea party protest and (b) a Sarah Palin book signing event, and which
> resulted in the following memo from Fox News management:


Funny how crap like that is 'significant' and 'meaningful', but left
wing news organizations doing similar crap isn't...

Mark Steese

unread,
Nov 24, 2009, 2:23:01 PM11/24/09
to
QueBarbara <que.barb...@go-awaygmail.com> wrote in
news:tl0og5lrae9b4b2ac...@4ax.com:

In this case, not so much: WFLD, the Chicago affiliate in question, is
owned and operated by the Fox Broadcasting Company.
--
Mark Steese
=======================================================================
PS: Your second question, you thought I forgot? I didn't. I never found the
banana slug. - William Least Heat-Moon

landotter

unread,
Nov 24, 2009, 2:40:19 PM11/24/09
to

PENALTY FLAG!

What similar crap?

Ted The Cat

unread,
Nov 24, 2009, 2:43:03 PM11/24/09
to
On Nov 24, 12:46 pm, David Friedman <d...@daviddfriedman.nopsam.com>
wrote:
> In article <heg3bl$eq...@reader1.panix.com>,
>  nos...@nospam.com (Paul Ciszek) wrote:
>
> >http://wonkette.com/412361/all-193-of-republicans-support-palin-romne...

> > kabee
>
> It's a confusing way of preventing the information, but without the
> accompanying audio it isn't clear whether it's wrong. "Back" might  mean
> "think would be a good candidate" or something similar, in which case
> one can back more than one candidate.
>
> Consider the parallel of "backing" a horse--i.e. betting on it. One can
> back more than one.

Would you present a pie graph with the slices add up to 193%?


Shawn Wilson

unread,
Nov 24, 2009, 3:02:29 PM11/24/09
to
On Nov 24, 12:40 pm, landotter <landot...@gmail.com> wrote:


> > Funny how crap like that is 'significant' and 'meaningful', but left
> > wing news organizations doing similar crap isn't...
>
> PENALTY FLAG!
>
> What similar crap?


Recently, pictures of armed men at Obama rallies (or somesuch) and
implications of racism. Turns out, of the two men one was black.
Lefty media didn't show his face... It wasn't an 'accident', or 'this
is the only picture we have'. They cropped the picture.

plausible prose man

unread,
Nov 24, 2009, 4:03:38 PM11/24/09
to

Maybe, if people were allowed to have two or three choices. You might
have to indicate percentages with primary color, and where they over
lap you'd have the secondary colors, although to hear Jerry tell it
there's such a color as Reddish Green.

Can you visualize this, or see why this would present useful
infomation? Or where it's possible that, say, 70% of likely republican
voters would support Sarah Palin, 54% would support Mitt Romney, and
60% Mike Huckabee?

Mac

unread,
Nov 24, 2009, 4:34:55 PM11/24/09
to

Sure, but that's extremely easy to portray on a pie chart, if you kept
the original data. You show the overlap, and that tells you a lot of
useful info. This graphic tells you "Fox is Stupid!", rendered in
Dexter's voice.

Peter Boulding

unread,
Nov 24, 2009, 4:41:10 PM11/24/09
to
On Tue, 24 Nov 2009 11:19:45 -0800 (PST), Shawn Wilson
<ikono...@gmail.com> wrote in
<b394a203-f94b-4192...@m33g2000pri.googlegroups.com>:

>Funny how crap like that is 'significant' and 'meaningful', but left
>wing news organizations doing similar crap isn't...

It's just as significant when (what you would call) left wing news
organisations do it and, just as importantly, whether it's done for
political motives or simply for profit. For example, a freelance
photographer's deliberate addition of a child's doll, or an extra pall of
smoke, to a photo of Israel's recent depredations in the Lebanon is in its
way just as reprehensible and richly deserving of the resulting bloggers'
ire as CNN's and Fox's "Saving Private Lynch".

In all such cases news organisations, whether through carelessness,
ideological bent, or Machiavellian machinations, are undermining the
principle of informed consent without which democracy is valueless.

That said, Shawn, you should recognise that Murdoch has a long and deserved
reputation for leading the field in this reprehensible respect--a reputation
that long predates his (and Fox's) ascendancy in the US.

plausible prose man

unread,
Nov 24, 2009, 4:45:26 PM11/24/09
to

Leave me alone, I'm drawing this with PSP, and its harder than it
looks. I just last week got Opus's ascaii obama to come out.

> You show the overlap, and that tells you a lot of
> useful info.  This graphic tells you "Fox is Stupid!", rendered in

> Dexter's voice.-

Charles Wm. Dimmick

unread,
Nov 24, 2009, 4:49:40 PM11/24/09
to
I don't get it. Of what importance is it that one was black?

Mac

unread,
Nov 24, 2009, 5:05:08 PM11/24/09
to
On Nov 24, 1:45 pm, plausible prose man <Georgefha...@aol.com> wrote:

>  Leave me alone, I'm drawing this with PSP, and its harder than it
> looks. I just last week got Opus's ascaii obama to come out.


I've done a lot of things with Marston mat, but I can't see how you
could use it to draw.

Shawn Wilson

unread,
Nov 24, 2009, 5:11:20 PM11/24/09
to
On Nov 24, 2:49 pm, "Charles Wm. Dimmick" <cdimm...@snet.net> wrote:


> > Recently, pictures of armed men at Obama rallies (or somesuch) and
> > implications of racism.  Turns out, of the two men one was black.
> > Lefty media didn't show his face...  It wasn't an 'accident', or 'this
> > is the only picture we have'.  They cropped the picture.
>
> I don't get it. Of what importance is it that one was black?


If you are selling the idea that the people openly carrying guns are
racists ('cause, ya know, Obama is a nigger...), it rather weakens the
notion if you show that one was black...

Mark Steese

unread,
Nov 24, 2009, 5:19:03 PM11/24/09
to
Shawn Wilson <ikono...@gmail.com> wrote in news:cec8d591-ecae-4050-b90a-
e7a009...@2g2000prl.googlegroups.com:

So, on the one hand, we have a botched report that was broadcast on WFLD,
the Fox-owned-and-operated affiliate in Chicago, on Monday, November 23rd,
2009 (the newsreader, Byron Harlan, stated that the numbers on the graph
were correct: "Palin is at 70 percent, about a third higher than this past
July. Mike Huckabee stands at 63 percent. Mitt Romney�s 60"). On the other
hand, we have an incident that happened recently, where pictures taken
somewhere, cropped by someone, were published in some medium.

I'm not entirely convinced that the two incidents are comparable.

N Jill Marsh

unread,
Nov 24, 2009, 5:21:53 PM11/24/09
to
On Tue, 24 Nov 2009 10:46:37 -0800, David Friedman
<dd...@daviddfriedman.nopsam.com> wrote:

>It's a confusing way of preventing the information, but without the
>accompanying audio it isn't clear whether it's wrong.

It's perfectly clear that it's wrong, it's a frigging pie chart that
adds up to 193%. I hope this is a joke.

It would have been perfectly okay to present it in a different manner,
assuming it was just reporting who thought X, Y or Z would be an okay
candidate, in which one could choose anything from none to all three,
but that graphic there, is wrong wrong wrongity wrong. Just unnatural
and an affront to the American Way, Zen Bhuddism and my uterus.

nj"and probably others"m


--
Welcome, stranger, to the humble neighbourhoods.

David Friedman

unread,
Nov 24, 2009, 5:41:08 PM11/24/09
to
In article <nqmog59vtkrjschjo...@4ax.com>,

N Jill Marsh <njm...@storm.ca> wrote:

> On Tue, 24 Nov 2009 10:46:37 -0800, David Friedman
> <dd...@daviddfriedman.nopsam.com> wrote:
>
> >It's a confusing way of preventing the information, but without the
> >accompanying audio it isn't clear whether it's wrong.
>
> It's perfectly clear that it's wrong, it's a frigging pie chart that
> adds up to 193%. I hope this is a joke.

Putting it as a pie chart is misleading, because that's normally used
for things that add up to 100%. But the numbers might be true.

...

David Friedman

unread,
Nov 24, 2009, 5:41:36 PM11/24/09
to
In article
<72f8170b-a7e2-4941...@o9g2000vbj.googlegroups.com>,

No.

But if I did, the mistake would be the presentation, not necessarily the
information.

David Friedman

unread,
Nov 24, 2009, 5:43:29 PM11/24/09
to
In article <96jog5lvvrf1ni47c...@4ax.com>,
Peter Boulding <pjbn...@UNSPAMpboulding.co.uk> wrote:

> On Tue, 24 Nov 2009 11:19:45 -0800 (PST), Shawn Wilson
> <ikono...@gmail.com> wrote in
> <b394a203-f94b-4192...@m33g2000pri.googlegroups.com>:
>
> >Funny how crap like that is 'significant' and 'meaningful', but left
> >wing news organizations doing similar crap isn't...
>
> It's just as significant when (what you would call) left wing news
> organisations do it and, just as importantly, whether it's done for
> political motives or simply for profit. For example, a freelance
> photographer's deliberate addition of a child's doll, or an extra pall of
> smoke, to a photo of Israel's recent depredations in the Lebanon is in its
> way just as reprehensible and richly deserving of the resulting bloggers'
> ire as CNN's and Fox's "Saving Private Lynch".
>
> In all such cases news organisations, whether through carelessness,
> ideological bent, or Machiavellian machinations, are undermining the
> principle of informed consent without which democracy is valueless.
>
> That said, Shawn, you should recognise that Murdoch has a long and deserved
> reputation for leading the field in this reprehensible respect--a reputation
> that long predates his (and Fox's) ascendancy in the US.

In this case, however, the issue isn't ideological bias, it's the
incompetent use of a particular way of presenting data.

N Jill Marsh

unread,
Nov 24, 2009, 6:16:44 PM11/24/09
to
On Tue, 24 Nov 2009 14:41:08 -0800, David Friedman
<dd...@daviddfriedman.nopsam.com> wrote:

>In article <nqmog59vtkrjschjo...@4ax.com>,
> N Jill Marsh <njm...@storm.ca> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 24 Nov 2009 10:46:37 -0800, David Friedman
>> <dd...@daviddfriedman.nopsam.com> wrote:
>>
>> >It's a confusing way of preventing the information, but without the
>> >accompanying audio it isn't clear whether it's wrong.
>>
>> It's perfectly clear that it's wrong, it's a frigging pie chart that
>> adds up to 193%. I hope this is a joke.
>
>Putting it as a pie chart is misleading, because that's normally used
>for things that add up to 100%. But the numbers might be true.

You mean like I said in my post? I expect the numbers are true. I
also expect that whoever chose to present them in that manner is an
innumerate door-knob, whatever their political affiliation.

nj"I like pie"m

Peter Boulding

unread,
Nov 24, 2009, 6:34:54 PM11/24/09
to
On Tue, 24 Nov 2009 13:34:55 -0800 (PST), Mac <ANMC...@ALUM.WPI.EDU> wrote
in <809994de-e7f2-428b...@m7g2000prd.googlegroups.com>:

>Sure, but that's extremely easy to portray on a pie chart, if you kept
>the original data. You show the overlap, and that tells you a lot of
>useful info.

IIRC pie charts were invented by Florence Nightingale and a mathematician
friend of hers, as an aid to the understanding of stupid Members of
Parliament (if you see what I mean). Hers, unlike Fox's had--admittedly
inelegant--ways over showing overlapping data sets in pie chart format.

>This graphic tells you "Fox is Stupid!", rendered in
>Dexter's voice.

No; this graphic tells you "Fox knows its audience is as thick as three
short planks", rendered in an Australian accent.

Greg Goss

unread,
Nov 25, 2009, 1:47:28 AM11/25/09
to
Shawn Wilson <ikono...@gmail.com> wrote:

>If you are selling the idea that the people openly carrying guns are
>racists ('cause, ya know, Obama is a nigger...), it rather weakens the
>notion if you show that one was black...

Gun nuts didn't blow up the federal building in Oklahoma because they
were racists. They blew it up because they hated the federal
government.

There are racists on the right. There are gun nuts on the right.
Some tiny fraction of both groups are unhinged enough to do crazy
things.

Who is implying that the gun nuts are racist?
--
Tomorrow is today already.
Greg Goss, 1989-01-27

Greg Goss

unread,
Nov 25, 2009, 1:50:09 AM11/25/09
to
David Friedman <dd...@daviddfriedman.nopsam.com> wrote:

> Peter Boulding <pjbn...@UNSPAMpboulding.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> That said, Shawn, you should recognise that Murdoch has a long and deserved
>> reputation for leading the field in this reprehensible respect--a reputation
>> that long predates his (and Fox's) ascendancy in the US.
>
>In this case, however, the issue isn't ideological bias, it's the
>incompetent use of a particular way of presenting data.

The use of the 9/12 footage to pump up the Bachman rally was
reprehensible. The odd pie chart was incompetent, and apparently
included an incompetent newsreader commenting on it.

Even though both were on Fox or a Fox-owned station, they are quite
different. The pie chart proves that a Fox crew is stupid. The
Bachman rally thing proves that Fox thinks its audience is stupid.

John Mc

unread,
Nov 25, 2009, 5:47:54 AM11/25/09
to
QueBarbara wrote:
> On Tue, 24 Nov 2009 11:38:50 +0000, Peter Boulding
> <pjbn...@UNSPAMpboulding.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 24 Nov 2009 07:52:21 +0000 (UTC), nos...@nospam.com (Paul Ciszek)
>> wrote in <heg3bl$eqa$1...@reader1.panix.com>:
>>
>>> http://wonkette.com/412361/all-193-of-republicans-support-palin-romney-and-huckabee
>> That wonderful graphic follows hard on the heels of Fox being caught
>> red-handed using old campaign footage to inflate the apparent attendance at
>> (a) a tea party protest and (b) a Sarah Palin book signing event, and which
>> resulted in the following memo from Fox News management:
>>
>> ] Effective immediately, there is zero tolerance for on-screen errors.
>> ] Mistakes by any member of the show team that end up on air may result in
>> ] immediate disciplinary action against those who played significant roles
>> ] in the �mistake chain,� and those who supervise them. That may include
>> ] warning letters to personnel files, suspensions, and other possible
>> ] actions up to and including termination, and this will all obviously play
>> ] a role in performance reviews. So we now face a great opportunity to
>> ] review and improve on our workflow and quality control efforts. To make
>> ] the most of that opportunity, effective immediately, Newsroom is going to
>> ] �zero base� our newscast production. That means we will start by going to

>> ] air with only the most essential, basic, and manageable elements. To share
>> ] a key quote from today's meeting: "It is more important to get it right,
>> ] than it is to get it on." We may then build up again slowly as deadlines
>> ] and workloads allow so that we can be sure we can quality check everything
>> ] before it makes air, and we never having to explain, retract, qualify or
>> ] apologize again. Please know that jobs are on the line here. I can not
>> ] stress that enough.
>>
>> <http://thinkprogress.org/2009/11/23/fox-news-memo/>
>
> I wonder if it makes a difference that it happened not on the main Fox
> News, but a local (Chicago) Fox station.
>
As in, in Chicago even the dead vote and vote often?

John Mc.

--
Every country has the government it deserves. - Joseph de Maistre

Charles Wm. Dimmick

unread,
Nov 25, 2009, 6:45:21 AM11/25/09
to

Are you saying that Obama is black? He doesn't look black to me.

Charles Wm. Dimmick

unread,
Nov 25, 2009, 6:48:34 AM11/25/09
to
Greg Goss wrote:

> Even though both were on Fox or a Fox-owned station, they are quite
> different. The pie chart proves that a Fox crew is stupid. The
> Bachman rally thing proves that Fox thinks its audience is stupid.

It is within the realm of possibility that both statements are correct,
and that Fox is correct in its assessment.

Charles

landotter

unread,
Nov 25, 2009, 9:28:27 AM11/25/09
to

Just like how making Michael Steele a big cheese somehow distracts
from the fact that the current GOP is a defacto right wing
authoritarian cult--which absolutely trends to in-group morality and
bigotry.

The "not one of us" theme is pretty loud and clear.

David J. Martin

unread,
Nov 25, 2009, 9:28:58 AM11/25/09
to
Mark Steese wrote:
> Shawn Wilson <ikono...@gmail.com> wrote in news:cec8d591-ecae-4050-b90a-
> e7a009...@2g2000prl.googlegroups.com:
>
>> On Nov 24, 12:40 pm, landotter <landot...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>> Funny how crap like that is 'significant' and 'meaningful', but left
>>>> wing news organizations doing similar crap isn't...
>>> PENALTY FLAG!
>>>
>>> What similar crap?
>> Recently, pictures of armed men at Obama rallies (or somesuch) and
>> implications of racism. Turns out, of the two men one was black.
>> Lefty media didn't show his face... It wasn't an 'accident', or 'this
>> is the only picture we have'. They cropped the picture.
>
> So, on the one hand, we have a botched report that was broadcast on WFLD,
> the Fox-owned-and-operated affiliate in Chicago, on Monday, November 23rd,
> 2009 (the newsreader, Byron Harlan, stated that the numbers on the graph
> were correct: "Palin is at 70 percent, about a third higher than this past
> July. Mike Huckabee stands at 63 percent. Mitt Romney�s 60"). On the other
> hand, we have an incident that happened recently, where pictures taken
> somewhere, cropped by someone, were published in some medium.
>
> I'm not entirely convinced that the two incidents are comparable.

Yeah, but you're a liberal stooge. If you saw things the right way you
would know what it all meant.

David

Richard R. Hershberger

unread,
Nov 25, 2009, 9:34:59 AM11/25/09
to
On Nov 24, 6:16 pm, N Jill Marsh <njma...@storm.ca> wrote:
> On Tue, 24 Nov 2009 14:41:08 -0800, David Friedman
>
> <d...@daviddfriedman.nopsam.com> wrote:
> >In article <nqmog59vtkrjschjoj480sl07o1hmgv...@4ax.com>,

> > N Jill Marsh <njma...@storm.ca> wrote:
>
> >> On Tue, 24 Nov 2009 10:46:37 -0800, David Friedman
> >> <d...@daviddfriedman.nopsam.com> wrote:
>
> >> >It's a confusing way of preventing the information, but without the
> >> >accompanying audio it isn't clear whether it's wrong.
>
> >> It's perfectly clear that it's wrong, it's a frigging pie chart that
> >> adds up to 193%.  I hope this is a joke.
>
> >Putting it as a pie chart is misleading, because that's normally used
> >for things that add up to 100%. But the numbers might be true.
>
> You mean like I said in my post?  I expect the numbers are true.  I
> also expect that whoever chose to present them in that manner is an
> innumerate door-knob, whatever their political affiliation.

To put it another way, pie charts are a conventional format for the
graphic representation of data, and typically follow certain
conventions. One of these conventions is that they usually present
percentages which add up to 100. This is, indeed, much of the point
of a pie chart. Many people who are not proficient with math
understand the visual metaphor of the pie being the whole, which in
turn is divided into slices of various size.

It is possible to use a pie chart in some other way, but part of a
competent presentation would be the making of a special effort, both
visually and in the accompanying commentary, to make clear the
differences between this and a more typically conventional pie chart.

This effort was not done. So at the very least the station was guilty
of incompetent visual design. I personally suspect that television
stations are more likely to have competent visual design people on
staff than they are competent interpreters of mathematical data, so
the odds favor the latter realm of incompetence. But if one wishes to
argue for the former and am willing to entertain the thesis.

Richard R. Hershberger

David J. Martin

unread,
Nov 25, 2009, 9:37:18 AM11/25/09
to

Edward Tufte?

David

N Jill Marsh

unread,
Nov 25, 2009, 10:53:42 AM11/25/09
to
On Wed, 25 Nov 2009 08:37:18 -0600, "David J. Martin"
<djmarti...@tamu.edu> wrote:

>N Jill Marsh wrote:
>> It would have been perfectly okay to present it in a different manner,
>> assuming it was just reporting who thought X, Y or Z would be an okay
>> candidate, in which one could choose anything from none to all three,
>> but that graphic there, is wrong wrong wrongity wrong. Just unnatural
>> and an affront to the American Way, Zen Bhuddism and my uterus.
>>
>> nj"and probably others"m
>
>Edward Tufte?

He's in the crowd, just behind and to the left of Zen Bhuddism,
brandishing a pitchfork.

nj"got a lgiht?"m

Charles Wm. Dimmick

unread,
Nov 25, 2009, 12:01:30 PM11/25/09
to

I should ask him the next time I see him, only I'd probably forget, and
instead raise some local issue dealing with the Land Trust.

charles

David J. Martin

unread,
Nov 25, 2009, 12:29:15 PM11/25/09
to

I thought perhaps he was following your uterus, hopefully without the
pitchfork.

David

Mark Steese

unread,
Nov 25, 2009, 12:46:22 PM11/25/09
to
Greg Goss <go...@gossg.org> wrote in news:7n428eF3k0nhgU1
@mid.individual.net:
[snip]

> Gun nuts didn't blow up the federal building in Oklahoma because they
> were racists. They blew it up because they hated the federal
> government.
>
> There are racists on the right. There are gun nuts on the right.
> Some tiny fraction of both groups are unhinged enough to do crazy
> things.
>
> Who is implying that the gun nuts are racist?

Who isn't? As with Republicans who don't deny that they believe Obama was
born in Kenya, everyone who doesn't deny that they believe gun nuts are
racist is just sitting back and letting the crazies who do believe it
represent them.

Mark Steese

unread,
Nov 25, 2009, 12:56:37 PM11/25/09
to
N Jill Marsh <njm...@storm.ca> wrote in
news:nqmog59vtkrjschjo...@4ax.com:

There's a clip of the newscast at this website:
http://rawstory.com/2009/11/whoops-fox-chicago-palin-graphic-rogue/

The actual poll results were posted on Fox News's website:
http://www.foxnews.com/projects/pdf/111909_PalinPoll.pdf

The newsreader claims that the poll shows that "When it comes to landing
the nomination, Palin is at 70%," but the poll didn't ask about the
nomination: it asked whether people had a generally favorable or
unfavorable opinion of Palin. 70% of the Republicans polled did indeed
say they had a favorable opinion of her, as 63% had a favorable opinion
of Huckabee, and 60% a favorable opinion of Romney -- and 46% said they
had a favorable opinion of Oprah Winfrey, but for some reason Fox has
decided to sit on the blockbuster news that nearly half the nation's
Republicans support Oprah landing the nomination in 2012.

Mark Steese

unread,
Nov 25, 2009, 12:58:27 PM11/25/09
to
"David J. Martin" <djmarti...@tamu.edu> wrote in
news:hejf0b$9kn$1...@news.tamu.edu:

> Mark Steese wrote:
>> Shawn Wilson <ikono...@gmail.com> wrote in
>> news:cec8d591-ecae-4050-b90a-
>> e7a009...@2g2000prl.googlegroups.com:
>>
>>> On Nov 24, 12:40 pm, landotter <landot...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>> Funny how crap like that is 'significant' and 'meaningful', but
>>>>> left wing news organizations doing similar crap isn't...
>>>> PENALTY FLAG!
>>>>
>>>> What similar crap?
>>> Recently, pictures of armed men at Obama rallies (or somesuch) and
>>> implications of racism. Turns out, of the two men one was black.
>>> Lefty media didn't show his face... It wasn't an 'accident', or
>>> 'this is the only picture we have'. They cropped the picture.
>>
>> So, on the one hand, we have a botched report that was broadcast on
>> WFLD, the Fox-owned-and-operated affiliate in Chicago, on Monday,
>> November 23rd, 2009 (the newsreader, Byron Harlan, stated that the
>> numbers on the graph were correct: "Palin is at 70 percent, about a
>> third higher than this past July. Mike Huckabee stands at 63 percent.

>> Mitt Romney�s 60"). On the other hand, we have an incident that


>> happened recently, where pictures taken somewhere, cropped by
>> someone, were published in some medium.
>>
>> I'm not entirely convinced that the two incidents are comparable.
>
> Yeah, but you're a liberal stooge. If you saw things the right way
> you would know what it all meant.

No, no. Larry was the liberal stooge, helplessly trying to mediate
between Moe (conservatism) and Curly (anarchy).

Lee

unread,
Nov 25, 2009, 3:54:20 PM11/25/09
to
> Richard R. Hershberger-

I've met a number of television design people over the years.
I remember, for instance, the times they worked very hard when the
Katrina disaster hit.
I don't remember their doing any particular math. I got the
impression they copied visuals presented to them, as present. So I
didn't get a feeling they were doing themath themselves.

The other part of it is that it's absurd on its face. You would think
that when presented with graphics with math errors, they'd catch them
and point out the mistakes for the benefit of those who issue
paychecks.

Most of the ones I've known: Not a supervisory job.

The mindset was still there -- but probably had a good reason not to
quarrel with management.

On the other hand, when you make pie, there's often times stuff left
over, extra dough, extra filling. That extra would be more than 100
percent of the pie. There's always a poetic rationale for irrational
numbers.

Shawn Wilson

unread,
Nov 25, 2009, 3:58:07 PM11/25/09
to
On Nov 24, 11:47 pm, Greg Goss <go...@gossg.org> wrote:

> Shawn Wilson <ikonoql...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >If you are selling the idea that the people openly carrying guns are
> >racists ('cause, ya know, Obama is a nigger...), it rather weakens the
> >notion if you show that one was black...
>
> Gun nuts didn't blow up the federal building in Oklahoma because they
> were racists.  They blew it up because they hated the federal
> government.

Gun nuts? Uh, Tim McVeigh and whatshisface did it. Where do 'gun
nuts' enter into it?

And the phrase 'gun nuts'... What does that mean? Are you trying
propaganda techniques to denigrate (in a niggardly fashion...) the
views of freedom loving Americans that the Constitution and civil
rights are not a joke?

> Who is implying that the gun nuts are racist?


That would be the lefty media who think that racism plays a
significant role in the Right not liking the radical Leftist Obama
solely/mostly because he's black (rather than, oh... a radical Leftist)

Shawn Wilson

unread,
Nov 25, 2009, 4:00:21 PM11/25/09
to
On Nov 25, 4:45 am, "Charles Wm. Dimmick" <cdimm...@snet.net> wrote:


> > If you are selling the idea that the people openly carrying guns are
> > racists ('cause, ya know, Obama is a nigger...), it rather weakens the
> > notion if you show that one was black...
>
> Are you saying that Obama is black? He doesn't look black to me.

No, the racist gun nut was black, Obama is a nigger...

Shawn Wilson

unread,
Nov 25, 2009, 4:04:19 PM11/25/09
to
On Nov 24, 3:19 pm, Mark Steese <mark_ste...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Shawn Wilson <ikonoql...@gmail.com> wrote in news:cec8d591-ecae-4050-b90a-
> e7a0095a7...@2g2000prl.googlegroups.com:

David Friedman

unread,
Nov 25, 2009, 5:07:47 PM11/25/09
to
In article <hej1vc$vsh$1...@aioe.org>, John Mc <Jo...@tdcogre.com> wrote:

> QueBarbara wrote:
> > On Tue, 24 Nov 2009 11:38:50 +0000, Peter Boulding
> > <pjbn...@UNSPAMpboulding.co.uk> wrote:
> >
> >> On Tue, 24 Nov 2009 07:52:21 +0000 (UTC), nos...@nospam.com (Paul Ciszek)
> >> wrote in <heg3bl$eqa$1...@reader1.panix.com>:
> >>
> >>> http://wonkette.com/412361/all-193-of-republicans-support-palin-romney-and
> >>> -huckabee
> >> That wonderful graphic follows hard on the heels of Fox being caught
> >> red-handed using old campaign footage to inflate the apparent attendance
> >> at
> >> (a) a tea party protest and (b) a Sarah Palin book signing event, and
> >> which
> >> resulted in the following memo from Fox News management:
> >>
> >> ] Effective immediately, there is zero tolerance for on-screen errors.
> >> ] Mistakes by any member of the show team that end up on air may result in
> >> ] immediate disciplinary action against those who played significant roles

> >> ] in the �mistake chain,� and those who supervise them. That may include

> >> ] warning letters to personnel files, suspensions, and other possible
> >> ] actions up to and including termination, and this will all obviously
> >> play
> >> ] a role in performance reviews. So we now face a great opportunity to
> >> ] review and improve on our workflow and quality control efforts. To make
> >> ] the most of that opportunity, effective immediately, Newsroom is going
> >> to

> >> ] �zero base� our newscast production. That means we will start by going

> >> to
> >> ] air with only the most essential, basic, and manageable elements. To
> >> share
> >> ] a key quote from today's meeting: "It is more important to get it right,
> >> ] than it is to get it on." We may then build up again slowly as deadlines
> >> ] and workloads allow so that we can be sure we can quality check
> >> everything
> >> ] before it makes air, and we never having to explain, retract, qualify or
> >> ] apologize again. Please know that jobs are on the line here. I can not
> >> ] stress that enough.
> >>
> >> <http://thinkprogress.org/2009/11/23/fox-news-memo/>
> >
> > I wonder if it makes a difference that it happened not on the main Fox
> > News, but a local (Chicago) Fox station.
> >
> As in, in Chicago even the dead vote and vote often?

Irrelevant, in this case. In Chicago, the dead vote Democratic.

Downstate, on the other hand ... .

Greg Goss

unread,
Nov 26, 2009, 11:02:11 AM11/26/09
to
Lee <skol...@gmail.com> wrote:

>On the other hand, when you make pie, there's often times stuff left
>over, extra dough, extra filling. That extra would be more than 100
>percent of the pie. There's always a poetic rationale for irrational
>numbers.

make the pie higher.

Lee Ayrton

unread,
Nov 27, 2009, 11:06:05 AM11/27/09
to

Hmmm. We should update the old slogan "Are you stoned or stupid" to "Have
you been watching Fox or are you stupid".


Lee Ayrton

unread,
Nov 27, 2009, 11:06:05 AM11/27/09
to
On Tue, 24 Nov 2009 14:05:08 -0800, Mac wrote:

> On Nov 24, 1:45�pm, plausible prose man <Georgefha...@aol.com> wrote:
>
>> �Leave me alone, I'm drawing this with PSP, and its harder than it
>> looks. I just last week got Opus's ascaii obama to come out.
>
>
> I've done a lot of things with Marston mat, but I can't see how you
> could use it to draw.

Coffee! I had coffee in my mouth when I read that!

Lee Ayrton

unread,
Nov 27, 2009, 11:06:05 AM11/27/09
to
On Wed, 25 Nov 2009 12:54:20 -0800, Lee wrote:


> I've met a number of television design people over the years.
> I remember, for instance, the times they worked very hard when the
> Katrina disaster hit.
> I don't remember their doing any particular math. I got the
> impression they copied visuals presented to them, as present. So I
> didn't get a feeling they were doing themath themselves.

A few months back we tisked and guffawed over Fox News' attempt to
relocate Egypt out of north Africa in a graphic.


Paul Ciszek

unread,
Nov 27, 2009, 11:20:56 AM11/27/09
to

In article <7n428eF...@mid.individual.net>,

The overlap between the two groups is not inconsiderable.
I believe that the fellow who shot up the Holocaust museum qualified
as both "a gun nut" as evidenced by his actions, and "racist" as
evidenced by his choice of target.

--
Please reply to: | "Any sufficiently advanced incompetence is
pciszek at panix dot com | indistinguishable from malice."
Autoreply is disabled |

Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages