patrick.net

I would also wager all I make in a year that anything anything as news worthy as 911 or the Boston Marathon bombing, Fox news viewership is more like

(all races and all socioeconomic backgrounds)
85% tuned into the Fox news
10% turned into CNN
30% of those tuned into Fox news are flipping channels to CNN during commercial breaks.
5% MSNBC

mell says

The only rational position after using logic and reasoning is to arrive at Libertarian

Libertarian philosophy holds some appeal, specifically the parts that overlap with liberalism, i.e. the social freedom and limited government control over the lives of individuals.

However, libertarianism has two fundamental flaws. The first is that it rejects the concept of public property. This is a huge failure. Without the concept of public property, no social cooperation is possible and the entire infrastructure and environment gets destroyed by the Tragedy of the Commons.

The second fundamental flaw is the unwillingness to apply reason, particularly game theory, to the application of libertarian philosophy. The ideology says let corporations, which are essentially collations of persons, do whatever they want because no individual should be restricted in his freedom except to prevent his infringing upon the rights of others. The problem with that is that corporations do infringe upon the freedoms and opportunities of a multitude of individuals when the corporations are allowed to do what they want. Corporations want to
1. Eliminate competition.
2. Pull up the ladder behind them so no future competition will exist.
3. Monopolize resources and markets.
4. Eliminate the bargaining power of labor effectively turning them into economic slaves.

None of these things are compatible with libertarian philosophy, yet libertarians always are much more vocal and active in "economic freedoms" than for social freedoms. And i quote economic freedoms because giving the powerful freedom takes away freedom from the general public.

CaptainShuddup says

Fox news viewership is more like

(all races and all socioeconomic backgrounds)

85% tuned into the Fox news

Wow, you're delusional. Whites do not make up 85% of America, and most whites don't watch Fox News and damn few minorities do.

In fact it is untrue that 85% of Americans even watch news. And one and a half generations (Millennials and half of Gen X) don't watch TV news, but rather get news via the Internet, and I'm not talking FoxNews.com.

Nobody can turn away from a train wreck and Fox news reports them best.

Quit denying that FOX news is the first channel you flipped to after the Brown shooting, Ohio House of Horrors 911 ect...

Dan8267 says

In fact it is untrue that 85% of Americans even watch news. And one and a half generations (Millennials and half of Gen X) don't watch TV news, but rather get news via the Internet, and I'm not talking FoxNews.com.

Then why do all the Liberals (and butt-hurt "conservatives" like Bartlett) continually wet their panties over Fox News? It is so unseemly and pathetic to see even President Obama cry about the 1 conservative cable news channel as it makes him look so impotent and petty. I'm sure Putin, China and the Ayatollahs have taken measure of Obama and his Prog coalition as they cry about Fox.

I think the main issue is that the Liberal/Prog hive-mind simply can't countenance a single dissenting voice from the PC narrative they constructed and hate seeing their monopoly as a media gate-keeper compete with other points of view. All this conservative talk is "triggering"!

I expect to see more Lib/Progs try and push the "Vast Right Wing Conspiracy" as the Hillary candidacy continues to implode along with Obama's legacy.

Dan8267 says

And once more CIC demonstrates the intelligence level of Fox News viewers, ironically confirming the point of the original post.

What I find amusing is the small margins between the "stupid and the NPR crowd", even funnier the metric is set by the NPR types. CIC is not a Fox news type, but that gets missed by your ilk...

socal2 says

Then why do all the Liberals (and butt-hurt "conservatives" like Bartlett) continually wet their panties over Fox News?

We don't. We're just wise enough to realize that in a Democracy or in a Republic, like the United States, it is a really, really bad thing for the voting population to be stupid, ignorant, and misinformed.

Dumb-ass conservatives like you are hurting this nation by supporting the most corrupt and vile, Unamerican politicians who actively sabotage our economy and national security for their own personal gain. And your too fucking stupid to even realize this.

indigenous says

What I find amusing is the small margins between the "stupid and the NPR crowd"

NPR viewers go the question right 39% more of the time than Fox News viewer. That's like the difference between getting an SAT score of 1000 vs 1390. One gets you in a good college, and the other gets you a job at McDonald's.

Dan8267 says

We don't. We're just wise enough to realize that in a Democracy or in a Republic, like the United States, it is a really, really bad thing for the voting population to be stupid, ignorant, and misinformed.

"Poll Finds Tea Party Backers Wealthier and More Educated"
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/15/us/politics/15poll.html?_r=0

"Republicans Know More Than Democrats, Says Study"
http://reason.com/blog/2012/04/23/republicans-know-more-than-democrats-say

"Yale Professor’s Surprising Discovery: Tea Party Supporters More Scientifically Literate"
http://www.ijreview.com/2013/10/87474-yale-professors-surprising-discovery-tea-party-supporters-scientifically-literate/

mell says

finehoe says

mell says

The only rational position after using logic and reasoning is to arrive at Libertarian

There's a reason no libertarian countries exist in the real world.

Switzerland, Andorra, Monaco, Czech Reoublic. New Zealand, Ireland, Hong Kong (left-libertarian/georgist)

Looks like monarchy and socialism is closer to 'libertarianism' than democracy.

Fox News is actually quite interesting in that it reflects the very rational fears of the formerly dominant Anglo Christian majority. Well, maybe not the majority anymore, and that is the issue in a nutshell.

It is a reaction to loss of power.

Its the fear of a nation that has outsourced everything, created a Ponzi Scheme on Finance, and has malivested funds in both the Public and Private trust by far more that most people would like to admit. The US has made bad business decisions, and has raised up lobbyists and Lawyers as the new lords. We have become like the barons and fifedoms of Europe that our forefathers risked coming to a new land to get away from.

Watch a video of JFK speaking.

Rather stupid and not well-read

I thought this was going to be a thread about the idiots that (mis)use the terms 'liberal' and 'conservative', when discussing american politics

Talk about erecting a straw man

Rather stupid and not well-read

Also probably a safe assumption about anyone that watches television programming. Especially the crap sold as news

Entitlemented says

Its the fear of a nation that has outsourced everything, created a Ponzi Scheme on Finance, and has malivested funds in both the Public and Private trust by far more that most people would like to admit.

For example if you take ponzi schemes in finance: is turning to total deregulation a rational response to the fear of financial companies actions? I don't see how one could follow from the other.

The exact opposite seems true: strong regulation in finance is your only chance, and what we see now is the result of years of deregulation.

The same with crony capitalism: Is small gov a rational response to this? No, a small government with weak regulations would give massive powers to large corporations. They would scam, extort and loot with no opposition.

The only rational response is a better separation between corporations and government, not less government. Meaning again regulations.

etc, etc...

As for outsourcing everything, aren't libertarians in favor of free trade?
How can one expect this will not result in outsourcing everything?
I don't know.

As for outsourcing everything, aren't libertarians in favor of free trade?
How can one expect this will not result in outsourcing everything?
I don't know.

----------

Ill take a guess

Most of said outsourcing requires subsidies. A libertarian would say cut out all the subsidies, and the problem would fix itself

errc says

Most of said outsourcing requires subsidies.

Any example of outsourcing requiring subsidies?

i guess it depends on what your definition of subsidy, is

How else could an american buy a dollar store item, that was MADE IN CHINA?

Sure, labor costs are cheaper. You can make labor costs zero, and i havent a clue how some of that cheap crap that people drive around buying on the cheap, leaves room for anyone to profit.

It all begins with extracting petroleum from deep in the ground, transporting it, refining it, selling it, delivering it, the factory that makes the crap, the packaging, inventory, shipping on a container ship, port, truck driver, warehouse, delivery to box store, recieving, stocking, register worker. Count in the neglected environmental costs, and every last rentier troll along the way, and i just cant see the MADE IN CHINA dollar store items surviving in a libertarian marketplace void of all subsidies

Id gather the crap would wind up having to be made closer to home, but what do i know

As miniscule as labor costs are the world over, i slways assumed that we subsidized the outsourcing by bypassing paying for the pollution costs, along with other political means

Fox is fundamentally undemocratic, poisonous and vile. Their only goal is to get stupid people to support corporate whores so they can continue to exploit their workforce and bathe in bullion.

Their only goal is to get stupid people to support corporate whores so they can continue to exploit their workforce and bathe in bullion.

------------

Case in point

Tricking all the rubes into supporting The Heritage foundations' biggest con of all, PPACA

socal2 says

"Poll Finds Tea Party Backers Wealthier and More Educated"

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/15/us/politics/15poll.html?_r=0

From article,

Tea Party supporters are wealthier and more well-educated than the general public, and are no more or less afraid of falling into a lower socioeconomic class, according to the latest New York Times/CBS News poll.

The article compares Tea Party supporters to the general public, not NPR listeners, FOX listeners, liberals, or leftist. So basically, they are more educated then the masses of poor people who don't follow politics and dropped out of high school. You have high standards.

socal2 says

"Republicans Know More Than Democrats, Says Study"

http://reason.com/blog/2012/04/23/republicans-know-more-than-democrats-say

Actually, the study exactly does not say that.

The studied linked to simply states that self-identified Democrats are less knowledgeable than Republicans of each party's stances on various issues. Again, it does not compare NPR listeners to Fox New listeners or liberals to conservatives. Also, it does not even attempt to compare intelligence, world knowledge, knowledge of current events, or scientific literacy.

You're certainly cherry picking.

socal2 says

"Yale Professor’s Surprising Discovery: Tea Party Supporters More Scientifically Literate"

http://www.ijreview.com/2013/10/87474-yale-professors-surprising-discovery-tea-party-supporters-scientifically-literate/

More literate than what? From the article,

Yale Law professor Dan M. Kahan was conducting an analysis of the scientific comprehension of various political groups when he ran into a shocking discovery: tea party supporters are slightly more scientifically literate than the non-tea party population.

In fact, tea party members tend to be more scientifically literate than other self-described conservatives, who have slightly negative scores, overall.

Well, if your going to compare the Tea Party to the general population or worst still, other conservatives, I guess some turds look better than others. Oh, and this is a single study that has yet to be replicated, something that's important in science as you would know if you were scientifically literate.

Now let's compare intelligence between conservatives and liberals.

From Psychology Today: Why Liberals Are More Intelligent Than Conservatives

Liberals think they’re more intelligent than conservatives because they are

Conservatives often complain that liberals control the media or the show business or the academia or some other social institutions. The Hypothesis explains why conservatives are correct in their complaints. Liberals do control the media, or the show business, or the academia, among other institutions, because, apart from a few areas in life (such as business) where countervailing circumstances may prevail, liberals control all institutions. They control the institutions because liberals are on average more intelligent than conservatives and thus they are more likely to attain the highest status in any area of (evolutionarily novel) modern life.

Conservatives are cave men

In other words, the conservative ideology, and especially one of its major facets — centered on a strong military, tough law enforcement, resistance to immigration, widespread availability of guns — would seem well tailored for an underlying, threat-oriented biology.

The authors go on to speculate that this ultimately reflects an evolutionary imperative. “One possibility,” they write, “is that a strong negativity bias was extremely useful in the Pleistocene,” when it would have been super-helpful in preventing you from getting killed. (The Pleistocene epoch lasted from roughly 2.5 million years ago until 12,000 years ago.)

Live Science: Low IQ & Conservative Beliefs Linked to Prejudice

There's no gentle way to put it: People who give in to racism and prejudice may simply be dumb, according to a new study that is bound to stir public controversy.

Oh, I could go on and on for hours on all the studies that have shown conservatives to be dumb-ass bigots who think like caveman and want to kill all the neighboring tribes before those tribes kill them. But what more proof do you need of the stupidity of conservatives than conservative media like Fox News and Rush Limbaugh? Every word they spout reveals their moronic nature.

Not to mention, it's really hard to pass than astronomy class when you think the world is only 6,000 years old. It's really hard to pass advance biology when you think evolution is the devil's lies. Science and the Bible are mutually exclusive.

Dan8267 says

socal2 says

"Poll Finds Tea Party Backers Wealthier and More Educated"


http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/15/us/politics/15poll.html?_r=0

From article,

Tea Party supporters are wealthier and more well-educated than the general public, and are no more or less afraid of falling into a lower socioeconomic class, according to the latest New York Times/CBS News poll.

The article compares Tea Party supporters to the general public, not NPR listeners, FOX listeners, liberals, or leftist. So basically, they are more educated then the masses of poor people who don't follow politics and dropped out of high school. You have high standards.

Also, note the date of the poll, April 2010, right after Obamneycare got enacted. At that time, the Tea Party had strong libertarian support. Later, the Tea Party got hijacked by religious fanatics, who imposed their pseudo-biblical agenda. Libertarians left and Bible bashers took over; the Tea Party fell from the party of Ron Paul (educated and often wealthy) to the party of Michele Bachmann (ignorant white trash seeking somebody they can look down on).

curious2 says

Also, note the date of the poll, April 2010, right after Obamneycare got enacted. At that time, the Tea Party had strong libertarian support. Later, the Tea Party got hijacked by religious fanatics, who imposed their pseudo-biblical agenda. Libertarians left and Bible bashers took over; the Tea Party fell from the party of Ron Paul (educated and often wealthy) to the party of Michele Bachmann (ignorant white trash seeking somebody they can look down on).

Love it!

The Tea Party from 2010 was OK, but now it is all crazy. Wasn't it the 2010 Tea Party that all the Progs and Libs in the Media were screaming were a bunch of dangerous racist gun nuts?

You really think the Libertarians are going to pull the lever for Hillary or Bernie?

curious2 says

Also, note the date of the poll, April 2010, right after Obamneycare got enacted. At that time, the Tea Party had strong libertarian support. Later, the Tea Party got hijacked by religious fanatics, who imposed their pseudo-biblical agenda.

Good point. I missed that. I'm slipping.

socal2 says

The Tea Party from 2010 was OK, but now it is all crazy. Wasn't it the 2010 Tea Party that all the Progs and Libs in the Media were screaming were a bunch of dangerous racist gun nuts?

You really think the Libertarians are going to pull the lever for Hillary or Bernie?

The Tea Party used to be Ron Paul's movement until it was hijacked by Fox News. Ron Paul, you'll remember, is the person who got booed at the Republican debate because he said that terrorism is the result of U.S. foreign policy.

During the 2008 primaries, entire boxes of ballots for Ron Paul were "misplaced" and not found until a woman, who voted for Ron Paul, went public after the district she voted in reported ZERO votes for Ron Paul. Oh, I bet a lot of those boxes were misplaced in other districts as well.

So no, the Ron Paul Tea Party was nothing like the Fox News Tea Party. The Republican establishment and rank-and-file loathed Ron Paul even more than Obama and Clinton put together. He would slaughter the sacred cow of conservatives, warfare spending. He wanted to audit the fed and Fort Knox. He wanted to let the banks fail. He wanted to stop the money printing press, taking away a huge revenue stream for the major banks, a stream that is supplied with tax payer dollars. The people who supported Ron Paul want nothing to do with today's Tea Party.

Finally, this is another example cherry picking data points.

Dan8267 says

I'm slipping

Your awareness is getting better.

Now if only you could admit your mistakes.

they're so rare...

yet surprisingly they appear in every one of your posts...

Dan8267 says

yet surprisingly they appear in every one of your posts...

Yes I'm sure you believe that...

What can I say, I'm a sucker for empirical evidence...

Dan8267 says

What can I say, I'm a sucker for empirical evidence...

An apparency can be deceiving...

in other words, it's not a lie if you believe it...

socal2 says

You really think the Libertarians are going to pull the lever for Hillary or Bernie?

And which one of these would a Libertarian pull the lever for?
• Skip Andrews
• Michael Bickelmeyer
• Kerry Bowers
• Jeb Bush
• Ben Carson
• Dale Christensen
• Chris Christie
• Ted Cruz
• John Dummett, Jr.
• Bob Ehrlich
• Mark Everson
• Carly Fiorina
• Jim Gilmore
• Lindsey Graham
• Chris Hill
• Mike Hucksterbee
• Bobby Jindal
• John Kasich
• Peter King
• Michael Kinlaw
• Dennis Michael Lynch
• George Pataki
• Ru Paul
• Rick Perry
• Michael Petyo
• Marco Rubio
• Brian Russell
• Rick Santorum
• Rick Snyder
• Donald Trump
• Scott Walker

Dan8267 says

in other words, it's not a lie if you believe it...

I'm sure you believe that...

I'm sure I don't and that you do...

Dan8267 says

I'm sure I don't and that you do...

below the level of cognisance is ignorance masquerading as assuredness

Isn't that the motto of Fox News?

Dan8267 says

Isn't that the motto of Fox News?

I don't know I don't watch Fox news, I heard it on NPR