OT, Kim, you never answered my question on what % of Americans own stock, and what their average income is. This is from a previous post who wrote, and was just wondering about it. Thanks.

Nearly half of all American households participate in the stock market.

Of Americans who do own stock, half have portfolios valued at $50,000 or less."

From the Federal Reerve Bank's Survey of Consumer Finance.

You say, "it will only undermine them in the end." I ask, "Which end?"

I'd think it might be difficult to ascertain "what % of Americans own stock." Do you count folks whose pension plans or other retirement schemes like annuities hold stocks? Whole life insurance, where the reserves are invested in stocks. Are mutual funds counted? Cash reserves held by employers, invested in stocks for the indirect benefit of the employees? Cash folks hold in savings institutions that invest in stocks.

I'd guess that almost every net tax payer with a view to the future 'owns' some stock one way or another.

Awwwwwwww, are the wittle bitty democwats worried that Fox may ask some tough questions?? Awwww, poor wittle babies.

Wouldn't want the wussies to be exposed to anything other than the softballs lobbed by their pals in the MSM.

Meanwhile the GOP candidates debate on any network or cable outlet that asks them, because they're use to the (liberal) MSM and have had to be ready for them since FOREVER.

You go soft when you're a democrat because you've never had to be that tough.

Long live Fox News. They may help the wussy democrat party actually grow up someday.

Seriously: if Republicans refused to debate in any forum sponsored by an organization or media outlet that was biased against them, there would never be any debates. Period.

The Democrats need to get over themselves.

I guess the Dems prefer to have their positions filtered through CNN, CBS, etc, rather than have voters hear their actual words.

What is even more ridiculous, is that these 'debates' are usually just ways for them to rehash their standard answers.

For Edwards to chicken out means that he's run out of ways to avoid his hypocrisy regarding his 'Two Americas' mantra.

"Because Fox News Channel's news coverage is balanced"

HAHAHA No wonder iraq is such a mess. You guys are completly out of touch with reality.

"Seriously: if Republicans refused to debate in any forum sponsored by an organization or media outlet that was biased against them, there would never be any debates. Period."

Exactly!! Why let the cry babies call the shots, NO debate on FOX, then NO debate ANYWHERE......

I'm tired of debating with these people. If no one understands the difference between RIGHT and LEFT by now, they never will!!

Fox will never let the whiny babies live this one down. This is totally humiliating to them. Now it's easy to see why the democrats don't want to fight terror. They can't even gear up enough toughness to be on FNC. OMG!!!

What happened to the men of the democrat party? When I was much younger, there use to be some.

What a great idea! now the right should boycott ABC,CBS, and NBC and we can have the debates on Utube.

Well I don't want to hear about the President hand picking which organization interviews him. This just validated blacklisting reporters/organizations you don't like.

They always say you should cut out the gangrene at the root.

Fox news is definitely a malignant growth. It's about time someone took a scalpel to it.

FOX news has issued a statement. Something in the line of "Moveon.org has stated they own the democrat party, this proves it's true in Nevada".

No democrat has the brain power to think for themselves so someone must do it for them, even if it's someone that would slit they're family's throat at the first opportunity. Soros has sworn to destroy the government of the United States and turn it to communism. With the help of the BDS dhimmi's it may work. Talk about BDS progressing to insanity, this shows it's already happened to millions of the weak minded dhimmi's. Is there any other kind?

Gee you don't think the president of FOX news calling Obama a terrorist had anything to do with it?

Fair and balance smear

This is perfect.

I hope the Republican party returns the favor.

I heard that Ann Coulter was the moderator.

I guess Civil Behavior does not believe in freedom of speech only lefty speech...typical fascist.

P.S. The more Democrats freeze out Fox News the bigger the squeal you'll hear from Murdoch. Squeal little piggy, squeal.

Oink, oink, oink.....all the way home.

Dream on Cilvil Behaviour dream on. This hurts Dimos more than
billionaire Murdoch...idiot.

Hey barneygoole you hypocrite piece of pig shit how about all the "nice" things that you moonbats call "your" President. Naaw that don't count. (barneyg' says he would have to check with the "moveon" crowd before he could answer.

uncivilb' makes it very clear what they are---COWARDS-they know they will get their ass kicked.

Repubs subject themselves to all kinds of Left Media bias, but the timid Dems can't take FoxNews? I seem to remember the last time a Fox newsie appeared at a Prez debate, no Dems were molested, nor expired from the vapors.

Maybe John John Edwards and Nevada Dems really are "faggots," no?

Heh.

Wavemaker,

Thank you, but I was asking Kim. Over 50% own stock under 50,000 in value. Wow. What amount is the average of that? What is the average income of the 50% of these people?

Why can't Kim answer the question, why do you have to regurgitate something that I never asked you? I asked Kim because of a previous post she made.

I also asked WildWeseal for his understanding of the golden rule, and he hasn't replied either. Would care to regurgitate his answer also?

That's impressive. The Democrats must have really been scared.

Yeah, yeah, the horrible local comments might call them the Democrat party instead of the Democratic party, or not automatically assume America is wrong. Given that Murdock himself raised money for Hillary Clinton, you have to be really lacking answers to avoid a million viewers worth of free publicity.

Uh, Allen, I think you have the wrong thread.

Check your thread, perty pls.

Civil Behavior has Beclowned himself, for lack of any knowledge of Murdoch, apparently.

Gotta love you Dims.

The moonbats think Fox News is the right wing mouthpiece because they never fabricated anything like the fake Texas Air National Guard documents during the last presidential election.

"Gee you don't think the president of FOX news calling Obama a terrorist had anything to do with it?

Fair and balance smear"

Barney, what the crap are you talking about? Are you referring to Fox and Friends morning show hosts discussing the Inisght magazine contention that Obama attended a madrass when he was a little boy? That's a long way from the president of Fox News referring to him as a terrorist.

He's talking about this, where Ailes made made this joke:

And it is true that Barack Obama is on the move. I don't know if it's true that President Bush called Musharraf and said, 'Why can't we catch this guy?'

I'm not sure how widespread the outrage is among the left, but it's absurd in any case, as the dig is clearly at the president. And he certainly didn't call him a terrorist.

Dems are a bunch of spineless pussies.

ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, MSNBC, NYT, LATimes, etc have been slanted anywhere from left to FAR left for decades now.

Serious question for any lib that has the balls or brains to answer. (these leaves out most I know)

Name another major network, broadcast or cable who has more conseratives on than Fox has liberals.

I see way way too much of the disconnected left on Fox, wonder if any of the above mentioned lib statios will care to match their track record of opposing viewpoints to Fox's.

Run n hide you pussies, run n hide.

Hey barneygoole you hypocrite piece of pig shit how about all the "nice" things that you moonbats call "your" President. Naaw that don't count. (barneyg' says he would have to check with the "moveon" crowd before he could answer.

Posted by: jhow66

If I invited the President to my house for nice discussion, then I called him a terrorist in public, should he still come over?

You guys just don't get it. Let's look at what you guys have been defending in just one week:
-It is fine to call John Edwards a faggot
-There's no problem at Walter Reed
-Libby was railroaded
-Fire seven Fed. prosecutors in one day and replace them with hacks, there is no politics involved
-Violate the 4th amendment rights of tens of thousands of Americans, stop coddling terrorists

FOX news has lost viewers in the last two rating periods. You want FOX, you can have it. Watch it become the network of Hannity and Coulter.

Match the ratings of FOX against: ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN and MSNBC.

Good luck with that, party of the inconsequential.

She NEVER called him a faggot, so maybe the problem is, besides your obvious and perverse need for attention, is you need to better your comprehension skills.

Speaking of fags, hows that Dem senator who was caught fondling a young boy? Isnt that worse than what Foley did with his emails n calls??

Mitchel,
Kim posted the thread I first asked the question on, and since she couldn't reply, I asked her again on her next post.

Why are you regulation on something you may not have any idea on? Can't Kim answer her own questions, or did I hit a nerve? Just let Kim answer the question I asked her on her previous post.

Same as WildWesel, what can't he answer a question? Is it also because I hit a nerve?

Fix is highest rated cable news network, end of story.

Show me the % of conservatove guests have one the lib networks, vs the libs on Fox. Can you do it trollboy, or will you prove yourself to be the insignificant attention starved friendless idiot we all think you are?

Allen, you mean like the unanswered question I asked the other day, 'since when do libs care about kids', that Lee and the rest all ran from.

Maybe you can step up and answer what network shows more Conservatives than Fox shows liberals.can you? will you?

Roger is a funny guy. Here is another one:
It is true that just in the last two weeks Hillary Clinton has had over 200 phone calls telling her in order to win the presidency she must stay on the road for the next two years. It is not true they were all from Bill.

Gibson wont apologies for saying that Obama attended a Madras. Hannity makes fun of his Selma speech. News Headline: Obama Smokes. FOX contributers call Obama "Hussein".

Breck Girl Edwards, on and on and on.

Do you really think that having the Dems pull out of the FOX debate is good for FOX or conservatives? How do you think the independents will look at it?

Alcudia

"She NEVER called him a faggot" Could you be any more stupid? She admitted to it on Hannity's show.

"Fix is highest rated cable news network, end of story." FIX ratings in nothing compared to the big three.

Alcudia, please, stop making a fool of yourself. You are giving right-wing bigots a bad reputation.

To b'google--yes -to kick your spineless ass.

O'Reilly out polls all of the shows on msnbc combined with viewers left over. cnn is a noshow.

B'google you are a liar. You didn't read the whole thing. But I have to admit that he looks like one.

This last election cycle the NM State Dem candidates were avoiding public debate at all costs. If they did accept a debate it was most likely they insisted that it not be recorded (though sometimes was by people in the audience with their own cameras.)

Some of the excuses were amazing. One debate was denied because the Republican candidate, they said, was hateful and allowing him the public exposure of his views would harm the State. I am NOT making this up. Wouldn't *exposing* a candidate's nastiness to the bright light of day be the obvious thing to do?

I thought this was just a New Mexico abnormality since local politics here tends to remind one of time spent overseas. It seems possible that it has a wider expression and this idiotic ploy in Nevada is an indication.

Does it matter if Fox really is a right-wing puppet? How can it possibly? There is no way whatsoever that anyone's words will be doctored. If your enemy gives you a platform from which to speak, you speak!

This last election in New Mexico there were any number of excuses to avoid any sort of unscripted public exposure of any Democrat candidate.

I think it's time to start looking for patterns. And I think it's time to ask, loudly, just why it is that Democrats are so dang scared.

barney boy, prove she called him a faggot, get a transcript if you know how, because she didnt call him a faggot. A pathetic excuse for a human being, and a lying lib lawyer, sure, he is that, along with being just a sallow sad individula, much like most libs.

Your posts prove you arent very bright. maybe someday a union will hire you, because we all know their standards are very low.

Fox is a cable network idiot, do you understand that abc, nbc, and cbs ARENT cable networks? I know that probably eludes you as im sure your mommy only lets you watch sesame street and sat am cartoons.

Keep showing up here trollboy, it just proves to us you looney lazy libs LOSE, as no one else in this life will give you any attention.

BTW barney, why not show me another network that shows more cons views than Fox does lib views.

barney boy, prove she called him a faggot, get a transcript if you know how, because she didnt call him a faggot. A pathetic excuse for a human being, and a lying lib lawyer, sure, he is that, along with being just a sallow sad individula, much like most libs. by Alcudia

OK, here it is (God are you stupid)

"I was going to have a few comments on the other Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards, but it turns out you have to go into rehab if you use the word 'faggot,' so I -- so kind of an impasse, can't really talk about Edwards." Ann Coulter at CPAC

Your posts prove you arent very bright. maybe someday a union will hire you, because we all know their standards are very low. by alcudia

Nice one, insult hard working Americans. Please be sure to repeat that crap the next time you need:
- the police
- a fireman
-a delivery
-your garbage picked up
-Construction
-Electrical work
on and on and on

Fox is a cable network idiot, do you understand that abc, nbc, and cbs ARENT cable networks? I know that probably eludes you as im sure your mommy only lets you watch sesame street and sat am cartoons. by alcludi

No shit, FOX's highest rated show is O'Reilly. His ratings have dropped 22%
Oct. 2005 -- 2,678,000
Oct. 2006 -- 2,081,000

The total audience for ABC, NBC and CBS evening news combined is:
23,000,000

So FOX can spew it's right-wing propaganda to it's 2MM views and the big three can show the rights hypocrisy to 23MM.

I like my numbers over yours.

BarneyG2000 wrote;

"I was going to have a few comments on the other Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards, but it turns out you have to go into rehab if you use the word 'faggot,' so I -- so kind of an impasse, can't really talk about Edwards." Ann Coulter at CPAC

I think she was asking for the transcript from Hannity and Colmbs, since we all know what she said at CPAC.

Clearly we disagree about the meaning of those words. Seems to me that she could have wanted to say,

"John Edwards wants to get rid of the "Don't ask don't tell" policy that the military has so that faggots can serve openly in the military."

Now, does that statement call John Edwards a faggot? Nope. Does it fit into her statement? Yep.

Therefore, one must conclude that she did not call John Edwards a faggot. There are many things she might have been referring to, like say, Isiah Washington calling his co-star a faggot and then having his behavior excused by going into rehab.

Seems pretty clear that is what she was commenting on, not on calling John Edwards a bad name.

But perhaps i'm wrong. Perhaps you could dig up a transcript of Hannity and Colmbs where she admitted to calling him a faggot, like you claimed earlier?

So she used John Edwards and faggot in the same sentence, but, where exactly does she say john edwards IS a faggot??

Trollboy, you are one of the jokes on this forum. In fact there are emails sent amongst us so we can all laugh at how ridiculous you are. Thanks for the entertainment, its usually not OK to laugh at the short bus kids but, you actually ask for it so....

Unions and hard work certainly isnt an absolute. Anyone GREAT at what they do certainly doesnt need a union, the lazy and the stupid typically hide in a union. Geez, did I just recommend you for a job?

Pruduction at my company increased almost 18% when I cut union guys loose, costs are down, morale is up, and bonuses are way up. Union pukes, yes, thats right, now begging to come back. Look at how unions ruined many American industries look at what the NEA is doing to education, and look at how worthless and useless govt unionized employed are!

And you keep avoiding/evading this: why not show me another network that shows more cons views than Fox does lib views.

"show me another network that shows more cons" by Alcudi

You got me there. FOX has Ollie North (convicted felon i.e "con")

Ha Ha

Anyone GREAT at what they do certainly doesnt need a union, the lazy and the stupid typically hide in a union. Geez, did I just recommend you for a job?

Pruduction at my company increased almost 18% when I cut union guys loose, costs are down, morale is up, and bonuses are way up. Union pukes, yes, thats right, now begging to come back. Look at how unions ruined many American industries look at what the NEA is doing to education, and look at how worthless and useless govt unionized employed are! by Alcudia

Anyone in a Union want to comment on this, or some that was raised by a mother or a father that was in a Union?

So how do Fox's numbers match up to the other cable news networks?

See trollboy, anyone with a brain laughs at katie and the other clowns, we all know theyre in the bag for the left. The lib media is doing to soldiers today what scumbag cronkite did decades ago.

And you keep avoiding/evading this: why not show me another network that shows more cons views than Fox does lib views. Seems to me if there was a network more balanced than Fox, you'd have proven it by now.

Speaking of hypocrisy why exactly is refrigerator boy still employed when his bribers have pled guilty, and the 90k was found in a freezer. Hypocrites?? they name is proceeded by a (d)

BarneyG2000, I was reared by a father that helped form one of the large unions. Before he died he saw what the union had become. One large group of thugs that care nothing for the worker as long as the leadership makes millions per year. As a fact one of my relatives is state president of the AFL-CIO and I always point out they have two places to go, jail or the graveyard if the follow history.
I haven't seen too many defending the operation of WR hospital. Sure there are things wrong in every military and V.A. hospital, the worst thing is they employ way too many America and Military haters, aka dimwits. Civil service, don't work, don't care and can't be fired. Hey that's another worthless union. Ran into one on my first visit after serving 22 years. Started to and should have punched his lights out. The fine isn't that much for simple assult so i'll do it if I ever run into the situation again.
The rest of your post are simply the raving's of a mad man. Something in line with congressman Okey. A real dangerous person to be in charge of anything. Even admitted he is responsible for the bill in the 70's that got millions slaughtered in Southeast Asia. Maybe that much blood on his hands has driven him crazy as BDS (actually guilt for supporting people like Okey) has almost every dhimmi.
Now let me get some rest and prepare to fight the next forest fire in the area, the pager is going off right now. Couldn't be anything else these days. Idiots with a match, must be the BDS dhimmi's at work.

And it is true that Barack Obama is on the move. I don't know if it's true that President Bush called Musharraf and said, 'Why can't we catch this guy?'

Call me crazy, but that sounds much more like he's poking fun at the president than calling obama a terrorist.

This is the work of moveon.org.

As far as I am concerned this is good news because moveon will pull the candidates so far to the left they can't win the general.

And it pleases me to no end knowing that all Soros' money is actually working against the possibility of a Democrat President. Imagine if this was a more reasonable group what a couple of hundred million could do.

See Joe Lieberman.

Fox news is definitely a malignant growth. It's about time someone took a scalpel to it.
Posted by: civil behaviorat March 9, 2007 10:18 PM

Ah CB you may want to switch your analogy. A malignant growth is a small part of a greater whole. The malignant growth you may be referring to resides over at MSNBC and goes by the commonly used nickname of Olberfool.

Anyone in a Union want to comment on this, or some that was raised by a mother or a father that was in a Union?
Posted by: BarneyG2000 at March 10, 2007 12:52 AM

Sure barneyRUBBLE. I spent ten years in the UAW as part of the Ford workforce. Each and every year the plant I worked at and the local UAW worked a "deal."

Some deal, it meant in ten years no one, I repeat for possible cranial penetration, no one was allowed to take his/her vacation when they desired. Plant employees were required to use accrued vacation time when the plant shut down for 2-4 weeks for model changeover. That could be at any point of the year, Jan., June, pick a month it could be anytime they TOLD you to use it.

And don't even get me started on how they pissed cash down political rat holes propping up political candidates THEY wanted in office.

NOW, on to this tripe barneyRUBBLE: Do you really want to compare these numbers?

Oct. 2005 -- 2,678,000
Oct. 2006 -- 2,081,000

The total audience for ABC, NBC and CBS evening news combined is:
23,000,000

Do you honestly want to (or need to) look so stupid as to compare a cable networks ratings that aren't available in every US household with a broadcast network that can be picked up from every house and business in America?

Do you? Do you have that strong of a desire to look ignorant to the nth degree?

Anyone in a Union want to comment on this, or some that was raised by a mother or a father that was in a Union?

My father and uncles were union organizers.

By the time of his retirement, my father was pretty frustrated by his own union representation.

First, there was so much infighting for control of the union that the winner generally had less than 50% support from the overall union itself. When negotiations started, even the company president knew that the union president didn't have wide-spread support and used it against him in negotiation.

Second, when my father was younger, the union policed its own. Yes, it would defend its workers against the company, but, if the person were truly a screw-up, the union members would pay him/her a visit to talk about straightening up their act. He was all for giving someone a second chance, but he grew tired of the union efforts going repeatedly to protect the same few people from the consequences of their own behavior.

I wouldn't go as far as the comment you quoted, but unions are experiencing huge losses in membership within the US and largely because of their own internal problems.

One thing I forgot barneyRUBBLE:

Ever hear the advice about never buying a new American made car that was built on Friday, Monday or the day surrounding a holiday?

There's much truth to that at the time. (not sure now) Cars on average had more assembly defects than any other time of the week and mainly because of personnel shortages of workers that extended the weekends (with little or no penalties from Ford because of union intervention)

In addition a large percentage were either working and suffering from weekend hangovers (literally) or stoned to the bejesus while on the assembly line. As a result workmenship SUCKED on those days.

And COULDN't be fired because, again, union intervention "protecting" their members rights.

And while I'm at it barneyRUBBLE, the Democrats had no problems in 2003 participating in a debates hosted by FNC and moderated by Brett Hume.

Wonder why that is?

Fox is to news what the Bush administration is to competency: hopeless, misguided, deluded and otherwise not even close.

Hmm
1st of all it was stupid of the Dems to think by appearing on FOX they could "reach out"
2nd..Coulter did use the word "faggot" during her speech the response was laughter and applause. Faggot is a hate word on par with nigger.Edwards was the first to drop out because he recognized that hate was embraced by FOX on Monday just as they embraced the attack on Obama's religious background based on ah..lies.
3rd..Losing every "Regular" Fox News viewer will not cost the Dems one vote.
4th...The Fox News style does appeal to many Republicans, certainly the majority here. That is fine. We should be able to go to a News place where we feel comfortable.
oops..coffee is ready..enjoy your Day..sunny and 60 here in Denver today..

Fox is to news what the Bush administration is to competency: hopeless, misguided, deluded and otherwise not even close.
Posted by: groucho at March 10, 2007 07:48 AM

In order for you to make an honest judgment means you must tune in on occasion. I'm sure Fox appriciates your support.

nogo postal:
1st of all it was stupid of the Dems to think by appearing on FOX they could "reach out"

Why not they did in 2003 as the link above shows and secondly, considering the demographic of Fox News how would YOU suggest the dems conduct their '06 campaign?

Shelter themselves and only speak to dems? That should work just fine... for Republicans.

3rd..Losing every "Regular" Fox News viewer will not cost the Dems one vote.

And you know this for a fact? How so? And while you're at it define "regular" viewers.

Beyond delusional blather I mean.

Ah, Fox News, the channel that foisted Tony Snowjob on the entire country.

What's that conservatives? I wasn't accurate in spelling Tony's name? You thinking,"That's not right to do!"? Well, maybe you could explain this inaccurate crap:

http://www.bradblog.com/?p=3570

Hmmm. Calling Mark Foley a Democrat not once but twice, well, that's "fair and balanced" to the Reactionary Idiots for Bush who adore Fox News. But as for the rest of us, this is merely one more example that Democrats should have nothing to do with the channel.

When the "Big 3" want a conservative to "balance a story," they look for John McCain (a faux conservative). Fox always welcomes true liberals to their network. They may get asked some hard questions that conservatives want answered and that the Big 3 would never ask but at least they get their opportunity to make their case. Libs may not like it but it truly is more "fair and balanced" than the Big 3.

How can libs say a network with Dan Rather and the TANG documents are, in any way, fair and balanced?

Moveon issues a command and the demo's march. Barney is no doubt a very big lap dog. If I was a demo, I would be offended that a political action committee commands so called presidential candidates what to do and they jump. That is leadership for you. I am sure the RNC will bring up their poor leadership again and again. Voice over: "How can these candidates stand up to terror when they cannot make a stand against a political action committee." Priceless. ww

Last night Acudia wrote some nasty stuff about PEOPLE that work union jobs:

"..maybe someday a union will hire you, because we all know their standards are very low. by alcudia

"..the lazy and the stupid typically hide in a union."

I ask if anyone wanted to defend themselves or their parents against such slander. Here were the responses:

scrapion, "I was reared by a father that helped form one of the large unions." Did scrapie defend his father? NO, he just went on trashed the unions.

How about marc, he worked in a union shop:
"I spent ten years in the UAW as part of the Ford workforce."

or ohio,
"My father and uncles were union organizers."

Not one of these righties defended themselves or their parents from being called lazy or stupid.

Typical of the right-wing mind set, it is better to repeat the talking points, than to stand up for yourself or the people that people that love you.

You might be against unions, fine but have some self respect.

Is it a coincidence that no one libtard has stepped up to prove that any of the 5 liberal alphabet network have shown a greater number of conservative s than Fox has shown liberals.

Libs, like most in unions, are sheep. They are slowly being led over the edge of the cliff, much like those Chrysler UAW emplyees, and they just arent bright enough to know it.

In the long run however, the joke is on them. What will they do when SS isnt around, because they supported the dems in the early 2000's who didnt want address a defined benefit, socialist, ponzi scheme program. Libs are all for avoiding personal responsibility, and yes, that starts with their base; unions, teachers, blacks, etc.

People like barney and lee have a malignant growth inside them, some call it liberalism, I call it hate, insecurity, the absence of self-esteem, and a perverse need for the attention NO ONE else in their pathetic lives offer them.

WTF in their sane, right mind would ever come ehre, or anyone else and devote so much time just being hateful and argumentative?

Alcudia,

First, I'm not a lib, so why should I answer some question poised to a lib? Also, I have other things to do instead of watching Fox, ABC, etc. They all slant what they call news one way or the other.

And why call the "wantabes" running for office names? Ask them pointed questions on things you are concerned about and then make up your own mind instead of following the so called party line. Same as blaming Clinton for everything, that is easier than thinking for yourself, isn't it?

A lib talking about self respect is akin to hearing Jimmah Cater's fave political organization, Hamas, talking about peaceful govt.

As weve seen on this blog there is no debating with liberals? You either accept their weird twisted diatribe or Your a right wing Bushbot!

So how exactly I am following the Libertarian Party line?? Do tell.

"Libs, like most in unions, are sheep." alcudia

It must have been that sheep mentality that lead all those fireman, police, port authority and emergency responders up the stairs of the Twin towers on 9-11?

FOX is fair? Here is the line-up:
Fox Friends-Three conservatives
Calvuto-Conservative
Gibson-Conservative
Hume-Conservative
Round table:
--Mort-moderate/right, Krauthammer, right, Barnes, right
Shep-moderate/right
-O'Reily-Conservative
-Hannity-Conservative
Colmes-stooge for Hannity

Yea, a lot of liberals on the FOX network.

Why not have the debate any way? Just put name cards on a bunch of little chairs of whomever doesn't show up? Have the reporters ask questions of those that show up and ask for a response from the empty chairs with the name tags and surprise no response and nothing new.

Barney, those people had no choice about joining a union. They were required to do so to get the job in the first place. Kinda weird how the ONLY choice the left seems to support is the choice of abortion. School choice, choice of joining a union in several NE states --- nah, choice isn't needed there.

And it's a chilling as hell precedent for a political party to refuse to debate on a specific news channel because they don't like them. If Bush did this in 2004 when CBS supplied the moderator AFTER the forged memos debacle occurred, the left would have gone nuts saying he is trying to blacklist news organizations on his "enemies list".

Once again, the excesses of guys like Nixon and McCarthy weren't the reason the Dems hated them. It's that they did to to liberals was the problem. They fully support what those two men did to their opponents.
-=Mike

My friends, Barney just doesn't get it. Do not waste your time and brain power trying to explain. It would need the receiver to have a logical, common sense mind. Sorely lacking in the modern liberal. Driven by hate, nothing penetrates. ww

FOX is fair? Here is the line-up:
Fox Friends-Three conservatives
Calvuto-Conservative
Gibson-Conservative
Hume-Conservative
Round table:
--Mort-moderate/right, Krauthammer, right, Barnes, right
Shep-moderate/right
-O'Reily-Conservative
-Hannity-Conservative
Colmes-stooge for Hannity

Left out Juan Williams I noticed. Didn't mention Greta, either. And when the heck has Hume been anything but moderate?
-=Mike
...meanwhile, would you like to play a game of "Who is the former Democratic aide" on the major network news?

Mike,

EXACTLY. funny how they seldom mention the unions, say, at the PA Convention center, who almost put the place out of business because there were all arguing over how many guys were needed to plug a light inti an extension cord, and secure it to the floor with tape. (4 was the final number, for a 3 minute task.)

Baggi said:

Clearly we disagree about the meaning of those words. Seems to me that she could have wanted to say,

"John Edwards wants to get rid of the "Don't ask don't tell" policy that the military has so that faggots can serve openly in the military.

I see. So Coulter was really calling members of our military faggots and not Edwards. Thanks for the clearing that up Baggi.

I wonder how many "faggots" have died or been wounded in Iraq and Afghanistan defending Coulter's right to spew her vicious bile. It says a lot about conservatives that they so lovingly embrace a hatemonger like Coulter. I hope they give her a daily show on Fox.

Can any ib with a brain(sorry barneyboy, youve proven otherwise) share with us how many of the lib networks have conservative anchors, or a greater % of conservative guests than Fox.

I cant stand to watch Fox much anymore, they always have their libs spew the moveon talking pts, verbatim.

mikesc, nice rant, but alcudia wrote that people who join unions (unions don't hire people dumbass) are stupid, lazy and are sheep. I disagree (i.e the police and fireman that died on 9-11 and protect us every day).

As far as the aid, that would be George on ABC, and he is no fan of Bill Clinton (just read his book), and every week George Wills is on his show.

On the other hand, Bill Bennett is a contributer on CNN.

We can go and on about this guy or that. It is just amazing that you people on the right wont admit that FOX is open about their right-wing bias.

Cable News Daily Ratings (P2) for March 8, 2007
Total Day

FNC - 904,000 viewers
CNN - 459,000 viewers
MSNBC - 288,000 viewers
CNBC - 250,000 viewers
HLN - 267,000 viewers

FOX = 904,000
Others = 1,246,000

Key Demo age 25 to 54 Prime Time
FNC - 443,000 viewers
CNN - 220,000 viewers
MSNBC - 172,000 viewers
CNBC - 127,000 viewers
HLN - 267,000 viewers

FNC = 443,000
Others = 786,000

FOX looses again!

Bwwwwaaackkkkkkk!!!!!

Yeah, these chicken-shits are the ones that I want leading our country.

Poor widdle baby-poos might get their widdle feewings hurt by Bwit Hume asking a hawd question.

Coulter has SPECIFICALLY said she was not calling Edwards --- a married father --- a homosexual.

mikesc, nice rant, but alcudia wrote that people who join unions (unions don't hire people dumbass) are stupid, lazy and are sheep. I disagree (i.e the police and fireman that died on 9-11 and protect us every day).

Those fireman and police didn't "join" willingly. They were REQUIRED to do so by NY law. Few, if any, would have joined willingly. And, yes, union shops tend to have DRAMATICALLY lower productivity than non-union shops.

As far as the aid, that would be George on ABC, and he is no fan of Bill Clinton (just read his book), and every week George Wills is on his show.

Tim Russert was one.
Chris Matthews was one.

Let me guess --- you didn't know that, did you?

FNC = 443,000
Others = 786,000

You compared FNC to 4 networks COMBINED. FNC, far and away, is larger than any of them.
-=Mike

Since Barney has been doing some paraphrasing, I went back to get Alcudia's original quotes:

Your posts prove you arent very bright. maybe someday a union will hire you, because we all know their standards are very low.

and ...

Unions and hard work certainly isnt an absolute. Anyone GREAT at what they do certainly doesnt need a union, the lazy and the stupid typically hide in a union. Geez, did I just recommend you for a job?

Pruduction at my company increased almost 18% when I cut union guys loose, costs are down, morale is up, and bonuses are way up. Union pukes, yes, thats right, now begging to come back. Look at how unions ruined many American industries look at what the NEA is doing to education, and look at how worthless and useless govt unionized employed are!

I did respond to the comments and, instead of reading what I said, Barney chose to attack me personally:

Not one of these righties defended themselves or their parents from being called lazy or stupid.

Typical of the right-wing mind set, it is better to repeat the talking points, than to stand up for yourself or the people that people that love you.

You might be against unions, fine but have some self respect.

The problem is that Barney (apparently) doesn't know a heck of a lot about unions himself/herself.
This statement for example....

...unions don't hire people dumbass ...

Ummm, Barney, a whole lot of unions actually do the hiring for the plant. Not all of them, of course, but enough. Also, a union shop will require someone to join within a certain period or not be hired full-time.

As to my father and uncles ... yes, they were union organizers, but they organized for the plants that they worked for - not, as Barney assumed, for the union itself. In other words, they dealt with multiple unions depending on the needs of the plant (and their own jobs) and how well the unions performed for the workers.

Yes, they supported the concept of the union but did not - as Barney seems to think that they should have - blindly follow the union's dictates regardless of whether the union itself was effective and/or corrupt or not.

Not every issue is strictly split along party lines. In fact, very few issues actually are.

Barney said,

So FOX can spew it's right-wing propaganda to it's 2MM views and the big three can show the rights hypocrisy to 23MM.

In other words, Barney just admitted the networks were biased aka, liberal.

Yet when have the GOP ever boycotted debates on those networks? They haven't!

Point proven! And by Barney the moron himself!

BWahahahahahah

Dear Roger, please continue with your plans to BROADCAST this debate. The American people will get the message when they see they empty suits are afraid to show up.
Hype the debate in every commercial break from now until its scheduled time.
Go ahead and pay Brit to sit there and ask questions to empty podiums.... and of of course wait the allotted time for the answers.
Feel free to broadcast it with a great big red banner crawling across the bottom of the screen "Democrat Presidential Hopeful Debate".

A picture (or lack there-of) is worth a thousand words.

ohio, you sure did put a lot of words in my mouth I did not say. First, in your hiring example, who writes the checks, the union or the employers?

Second, I never once took an opinion on unions, I just defended the people that work for unions from being called stupid, lazy and sheep.

Lastly, by your silence on the issue, you must be agreeing that your father and uncle are/were stupid, lazy and sheep.

Alcudia, Marc, Scrappy are correct, BarneyBoy, your arguments are "shoot from the hip," irrelevant comparisons, and plain ignorance.

We do all secretely laugh at you.

You don't get it--MSM viewership is down dramatically over the last several years; consistent with a loss of credibility.

In Nicaragua, the Marxist Daniel Ortega has won the presidency with only 38% of the vote, and he gives no interviews to the Press, and did not do so, not even a debate among candidates, durning the campaign. Interesting approach you boys on the Left have--hide from the voters.

When Britt Hume presided over the debates in the prior presidential campaign, there was no criticism of him being biased, or "dangerous," towards Demos. So, it's a cheap ploy by the Dims when they have no basis in the one relevant past occasion.

If you just kept your "mouth" shut, you wouldn't come off looking like a clown.

By the way, ever wonder what impact unions had on the demise of the Big 3 automakers? US Steel? Airlines?

Edwards Campaign: 'FOX NEWS has already proven they have no intention of providing 'fair and balanced' coverage of any Democrat in this election'...

Okkk, so Mr Edwards, you are too darn afraid to SPEAK for yourself, you need COVERAGE... and oh gee, only coverage you approve.

Got it, Mr Chavez... er, Edwards.

Mitch, be careful for what you wish for. MSM viewer-ship might be down (still 23MM viewers each night), but so is FOX, and guess who's viewer-ship is up? That is right MSNBC (Obermann). Overall FOX is down 24% and MSNBC is up 32%.

The data is old, but based on recent data, the trend has continued and will continue as long as Ann Coulter appears on FOX

FNC CNN MSNBC HLN CNBC
July '06: 404 278 142 104 61
July '05: 492 210 111 151 61
% change: -24% +32% +28% -31% 0%

I love it, syllabucks. I can't see it happening but as a response to this incredible insult it would be entirely justified.

And I notice that the libs are arguing two things... unions (what this has to do with Dem debates, I can't imagine) and the perfidity of Fox News.

So is missing the point on purpose or what?

EVEN IF Fox News was every bit as bad as people say (it's not, despite all the whining by the professional whiners who never actually *watch* the news segments but just complain about O'Reilly which is easy to do because he's an *ss) it would not make any difference to a debate between Dem politicians. If Fox tried anything untoward everyone would know it.

The ONLY thing to take from this little drama is that Dem candidates have passed up an opportunity to bring their message to the public. Why? Is it because MoveOn owns the party? I doubt it, though certainly being able to point that way helps distract from how pleased the candidates are to avoid public debate.

Better to depend on professionally produced ads on television and comfortable fundraising dinners with supporters.

Voters deserve better. Rather than be pleased that the Dem candidates have agreed to shun the evil Fox News as some sort of ideological victory, Dem voters should be asking why the candidates won't put themselves forward in the interest of informing voters of their views and allowing a side-by-side opportunity to judge between them.

I suppose I shouldn't complain. The end result will be, once again, that the candidate most able to avoid exposure will be the last man standing. It's a primary process of attrition that works more in the other party's favor than anything else.

Barneyboy, stupid idiot, you think MSNBC is going to triple there viewership? You think that Fox is going to lose 60% of its viewership.

You liberals just don't do numbers well, nor logic, it seems.

I'd much rather be in Fox's shoes, king of the hill in cable news.

If you get any stupider in your pronouncements today, I may be forced to suspend commenting, for fear of tossing on my computer from hysterical laughing.

CABLE NEWS RACE
MONDAY, FEB 5, 2007
VIEWERS

FOXNEWS O'REILLY 2,579,000
FNC HANNITY/COLMES 1,852,000
FNC GRETA 1,572,000
FNC SHEP SMITH 1,390,000
FNC HUME 1,297,000
CNN DOBBS 818,000
CNN BLITZER 675,000
CNN COOPER 636,000
CNN KING 624,000
MSNBC OLBERMANN 610,000
CNNHN GRACE 476,000
CNN ZAHN 451,000

Priceless editorial at Las Vegas Review Journal, pertinent part:

"The approach of outfits such as MoveOn.org is so juvenile it's laughable. Imagine if every political organization created litmus tests for news organizations before agreeing to appear on their programming. Republicans would have boycotted PBS, CBS, NBC, ABC, National Public Radio and The Associated Press decades ago.

This hyperventilation results from the fact that far-left Democrats have no comparable media outlet, nor any widespread national appeal, for their radical views in favor of heavy-handed regulation, wealth redistribution, diplomatic capitulation and economic protectionism. So they attack their rivals' messenger with a reckless barrage of rhetoric that cuts down their own allies with friendly fire.

By Friday, the Nevada Democratic Party caved in to the lunatic fringe and beganseeking a more "appropriate" television partner.

Comedy Central, perhaps?"

Amen, bro.

If they are legally able to, they should still air this debate.

Mitch, that is fine with me. You keep FOX news and your 2MM viewers, and I'll keep the 23MM MSM viewers, and we will see who wins on 2008.

I like my odds.

Barney, Barney, Barney, you ASSume all those viewers of which you crow are all left wing moonbats... and you are quite wrong.

No matter how you cut it, America has conservative VALUES among which is bravery rather than cowardice, truth rather than expediency.

How many polls, suverys and studies shall I quote for you?

I love how Barney proves our point for us. We have Fox News and he has all the others who side with the left. And our one channel is cable.

Thank you Barney. You just proved what we've been saying for years. We have Fox, you have all the rest, and you STILL can hardly win an election and you STILL whine.

Barney, let me introduce you to Mr. Wussy. Oh wait, you two have already met.

Barney, who has abused you so early in life to make you so argumentative, disruptive, hateful, and ignorant?

Jo-

The libs always skewer fox for 'rw bias'every chance they get, HOWEVER, ever see them say anything about how biased the lib alphabet networks, NYT, Globe, LATimes, St PEte times, etc all are?

These guys would get at least a little respect if they were objective, but, I cant see that happening, EVER.

Some still believe it was FEMA who was at fault for FEMA, some still believe tthat Rather didnt lie to influence an election, some evn believe Joe Wilson and his hussy wife. Guess thats their right, but, either mention all bias, or none.

Foz has more libs on it, than all of the lib networks have conservative voices. Yet, no lib has addressed this. Wonder why? Could it be they know it, and cant come up with a reason?

"Some still believe it was FEMA who was at fault for FEMA" by Alcudia

Where would we get that idea?

"Foz has more libs on it,.." by Alcudia

I must have missed that episode of Happy Days?

Alcudia screeched:

ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, MSNBC, NYT, LATimes, etc have been slanted anywhere from left to FAR left for decades now.
...
Name another major network, broadcast or cable who has more conseratives on than Fox has liberals.
...
Show me the % of conservatove guests have one the lib networks, vs the libs on Fox. Can you do it trollboy, or will you prove yourself to be the insignificant attention starved friendless idiot we all think you are?
...
Maybe you can step up and answer what network shows more Conservatives than Fox shows liberals.can you? will you?
...
BTW barney, why not show me another network that shows more cons views than Fox does lib views.
...
And you keep avoiding/evading this: why not show me another network that shows more cons views than Fox does lib views.
...
And you keep avoiding/evading this: why not show me another network that shows more cons views than Fox does lib views. Seems to me if there was a network more balanced than Fox, you'd have proven it by now.
...
Is it a coincidence that no one libtard has stepped up to prove that any of the 5 liberal alphabet network have shown a greater number of conservative s than Fox has shown liberals.
...
Can any ib with a brain(sorry barneyboy, youve proven otherwise) share with us how many of the lib networks have conservative anchors, or a greater % of conservative guests than Fox.

Oh my, Alcudia. You've built yourself quite a pedestal of right-wing rhetoric and wingnut ignorance there. Makes it easier to kock you off with a flick of the finger of the facts:

In every year examined by the study -- 1997 - 2005 -- more panels tilted right (a greater number of Republicans/conservatives than Democrats/progressives) than tilted left. In some years, there were two, three, or even four times as many righttitled panels as left-tilted panels.

To paraphrase you... Alcudia, you are one of the jokes on this forum.

Awwwwwwww, how cute! Looks like Sock Puppet Jo tried to get in on the lying action too! Though it was quite amusing to see Sock Puppet Jo whine about "wittle bitty" people who have issues with their communication outlets.

barneyA-H"OLE!
Last night Acudia wrote some nasty stuff about PEOPLE that work union jobs:

"..maybe someday a union will hire you, because we all know their standards are very low. by alcudia

"..the lazy and the stupid typically hide in a union."

I ask if anyone wanted to defend themselves or their parents against such slander.

No barneyA-hole you asked this:

Anyone in a Union want to comment on this, or some that was raised by a mother or a father that was in a Union?

NOTE A-HOLE, you asked specifically about people having experience with union membership.

A-HOLE!

You got exactly what you asked for and when you weren't happy getting what you wanted you responded with this:

Lastly, by your silence on the issue, you must be agreeing that your father and uncle are/were stupid, lazy and sheep.

barney-A-HOLE, note our "silence" was on something you never asked for, then you stretch that "non-response" into some fantastically delusional screed on how we "agree" our relatives are stupid, lazy and sheep.

CONGRATULATIONS, now get back on your meds before you or someone innocent gets hurt (via a workplace shooting).

Well, gee, Brian I suppose MEDIAMATTERS.ORG is justy the type of impartial outfit whose "research" just can't be brought into question.

Just one quick problem in a quick glance of their methodology --- they didn't count the HOSTS --- and they have a tendency to be Democratic aides. ALSO, they didn't actually NAME the reporters and how they identified them. They ASSURED us that they did it fairly --- but there is no way to backtrack.

So, it's a "study" that cannot be replicated, which makes it utterly useless.
-=Mike

ohio, you sure did put a lot of words in my mouth I did not say. First, in your hiring example, who writes the checks, the union or the employers?

Barney, no one writes the checks when someone is hired. Now, if you MEANT something different than you SAID, just tell us what you really meant to say.

Obviously unions do hire people - who they also employ - so either way your statement was incorrect.

Second, I never once took an opinion on unions, I just defended the people that work for unions from being called stupid, lazy and sheep.

Lastly, by your silence on the issue, you must be agreeing that your father and uncle are/were stupid, lazy and sheep.

A fortunate coincidence then ... I never claimed that you took a position on unions.

Could you point out the statement where someone said all members of every union were called "lazy, stupid and sheep"?

I said SOME unions had problems - which given the rapid decline in union membership in this country is like saying 'the sky looks blue today'.

I also said that some members in good unions create problems - again not earthshaking news.

What I don't agree with is your premise that any criticism of unions and/or union members is equivalent to condemning all unions and all union members. Unions, like other institutions, should be open to questions and honest evaluation.

marc, thanks for the response. I see that you still consider yourself a lazy, stupid sheep. Keep up the good work.

In marc's defense, he is trying to have a conversation with you and you have a tendency to dumb down anything you're associated with, Barn.
-=Mike

So, it's a "study" that cannot be replicated, which makes it utterly useless.

Wrong again. They detailed what networks and shows they based the study on. They detailed the methodology. They listed their aggregate numbers. That information is public. The media is available. You're free to do your own analysis and present how you came to different conclusions. Nice try, though.

Wrong, silly Brian.

Mediamatters is a left wing outfit run by the wacko who used to write anti-Clinton stories (can't remember his name, don't care).

You can't just accept their "aggregate" data, because it's based on a subjective decision, i.e. is a talking head left, right, moderate.

No respectable news organization would cite Media Matters on this topic.

Where do you and BarneyRubble come from? If the water is poisoned, or the food has caused this delusional thinking, perhaps we can clean it up and relieve you of your infirmity.

Ah, when you can't refute the cold hard data, attack the source. The expected response.

Where do you and BarneyRubble come from?

Can't speak for him, but I come from Realworld. Hope you're enjoying your stay in Rhetoricworld.

Silly Mitchell. Truth is for grownups.

Wrong again. They detailed what networks and shows they based the study on. They detailed the methodology. They listed their aggregate numbers. That information is public. The media is available. You're free to do your own analysis and present how you came to different conclusions. Nice try, though.

I read the study (odds are, you did not). They did not discuss who was conservative or liberal. It was simply "We did this..." but no actual documentation of anything. No "On this date, these people were on the show. (x) was conservative, etc"

And leaving out the "moderators", who tend to be liberal, is comical.
-=Mike
-=Mike

I read the study (odds are, you did not).

Foolish little boy.

They did not discuss who was conservative or liberal. It was simply "We did this..." but no actual documentation of anything.

They described what they did. It is repeatable by your or anyone else who wants to disprove their conclusions. You want their raw data? Well tough luck. The media they analyzed is all public. Go get it, and do an analysis yourself. When you have a different conclusion, then you can knock theirs. But until then you're just whining.