patrick.net

Anyone ever see the movie "Idiocracy"? Where all the "news" mainly involves naked women and monster trucks?

wthrfrk80 says

Anyone ever see the movie "Idiocracy"? Where all the "news" mainly involves naked women and monster trucks?

Makes you wonder........... People are sensitive about their sex lives I guess. I don't really care to much as to mine. I'm used to that kind of bullshit.

Stuff like that comes out of platos rear like you can't imagine. Or Dennis Millers mouth. I like Dennis ok. Hes fairly agile and is really amiable. I steal some of his stuff so. HAHAHA. Hes good no doubt. I have a real short list of comedians I like. Very few make that cut. You have to try at it.

Jay Leno is funny. They just won't cut him loose and let him do his thing.. No bad wordies. A lot of them are like that it ruins things. Its not the words mind you. You can't create. SEE. Good comedians understand that and hit the edges hard and curse at fido when at home. More Miller stuff.....

SeX IS SeX. If we really cared. We don't for the most part. If you want to see my pee pee, hey I'll show it to you just ask. Of course I would have to wonder why you were so interested in it. Maybe it has some rare earth. Or its a rare earth thingy. Maybe you want to scrape it I don't know. Stuff like that obviously dosen't bother us. Save it for the people of the Religion cults.

Way to much Jesus, Jesus in the company. Cause well Jesus and the company just couldn't make it without each other. ALL YOU TRUE BELIEVERS. Yep then there is the other group. Its getting really fucking redundent. Ask anyone that trys to teach kids with learning disorders. Redundancy in life just dosen't seem to occur to them in any conscious way.

Jesus is at your company Don't believe me go to work and start yelling this is all fucking, fucked up at work the first one to gasp and rat the guy out might be Mr. Atheist. Mr. Liberal. Mr. Hear no Evil. See no Evil. Speak no Evil. Hes not as stupid as one might think. He feels its how you survive.

We are for the most part are on the earth people. See. We don't come to the light. We just like the rest of the earth are uncontrollable for the most part. Which means we can all speak our minds there are far to many of us to kill. Which means that "one way" free speech talk you have been giving us all these years. Is BS. Your BS.

Until the internet showed up. Which you took a nice shot at just recently. Cause you didn't like what was being said. So we can live without certain things of course. Even if it disappeared. You would still have the problem of trying to rope and corral people like me. Cause the earth never shuts up. That you can never rope and corral.

Which boils down to intimidation of people. By many different means. Probing to find their weak spot. Which I really don't like. People that would otherwise speak their minds. However they might feel personally threatened. Have to parrot whatever they feel, keeps them safe and warm otherwise....... I don't really poo poo what other people say for the most part. I really don't like people being bullied. Some people are like that they see someone that is easily bullied and jump on it quick. Some of us really don't like that. Intimidation of people. Intimidation of the earth by carange which is really stupid to do. Is going to get you nothing but trouble. Your troubles are solved. Its easy enough. Why wait?

marcus says

uomo_senza_nome says

you are destroying any ounce of credibility that you may have

uomo, I see you aren't very familiar with Abe. Credibility ?

Yeah, I was unaware that there was an ounce of credibility there to destroy.

wthrfrk80 says

Anyone ever see the movie "Idiocracy"?

You mean the documentary of our future written by time travelers?

Honest Abe says

When you have a business owner as a defendent the other party tries to get the jury to think "gee, the law says he doesn't owe the defendent anything...but he's "wealthy" and the poor plaintiff is a single mother, or a minority, or a homosexual, or a transgender, or a black, jewish, left handed, gay lesbian - and Mr. Moneybags can afford it, so lets find in the plaintiffs favor".

And there you have it. Based on fact - NO, based on feeling - YES.

Please cite a case where this has happened, and it was not overturned upon appeal.

thomas.wong1986 says

its no mystery that FOX outranks in the number of viewers over CNN or MSNBC.

Paraphrased: it's no mystery that there are a lot of ignorant, dumbed down and propaganda-believing people in America.

marcus says

uomo, I see you aren't very familiar with Abe.

leoj707 says

I was unaware that here was an ounce of credibility there to destroy.

LOL, which is why I conditionally qualified it with "may have".

I think he does have one valid point at least, which is that corruption in governance is at the heart of several problems in this country. But the few valid points that he has is surrounded with so many dishonest lies, it's hard to see clearly the credible points that he states.

The fast and furious, the New Black Panthers intimidating voters in Philly, B.J. Clintons indiscretions in the White House are several that come to mind.

Anything that could embarrass a liberal is covered up and concealed by the mainstream media, but joyfully exposed by FOX.

And of course it works exactly the opposite when a conservative embarrasses himself.

leoj707 says

Please cite a case where this has happened, and it was not overturned upon appeal.

Certainly there are lawsuits where this happens. It's a game of getting the kind of jurors who will think, "the insurance company can afford to pay that." It could be malpractice or some sort of accident, of course it happens. In the jury selection process the lawyer for the plaintiff is going to try to get those type of jurors, and he or she may succeed.

I was fortunate to be excluded from a civil case which was a suit which was basically of an insurance company. I think I was excluded because of my education level. Each side gets to exclude a certain number. It is very much a game.

marcus says

Certainly there are lawsuits where this happens. It's a game of getting the kind of jurors who will think, "the insurance company can afford to pay that." It could be malpractice or some sort of accident, of course it happens.

Just to be clear that you are agreeing with abe's comment that, "[T]he law says [the rich defendant] doesn't owe... [but] the poor plaintiff is a single mother, or a minority, or a homosexual, or a transgender, or a black, jewish, left handed, gay lesbian... so [the jury] find[s] in the plaintiffs favor".

So, in abe's scenario a poor transgendered black single mother trips over a laptop, on which Microsoft Windows is installed, breaking her arm. She sues Bill Gates, who legally has absolutely no liability. A jury finds in the woman's favor with a multimillion dollar judgment against Bill Gates.

I would love to see an example of a case like this.

I was not agreeing with the specifics of what Abe said (which I didn't even understand), but rather that there are law suits where the objective is to get sympathetic jurors to bilk a rich person or their insurance company for an undeserved settlement.

It happens all the time. And the jurors in those cases (undeserved damages) are usually uneducated types who are thinking why not, they can afford it.

Where I dissagree with Abe, is I think this is okay, because it's the price we pay for being able to seek justice through litigation for legitimate wrongs done against us.

The game probably could be tweaked to be a little cleaner though.

leoj707 says

You mean the documentary of our future written by time travelers?

Yes, that one.

As soon as life "evolves" to the point where it can discover the utter meaninglessness of its own existence, it will invent a way to stop reproducing. This is already happening (birth control, abortion, etc). The only people who will survive are the willfully ignorant and stupid.

Marcus, you're right "it happens all the time". Right again: "the jurors think why not, they can afford it".

But its not ok. Any more than it would be for you to be in compliance with the law but get arrested and sentenced to hard time based on the juries "feelings". Yea, he's innocent, but he can afford to spend a few years behind bars. Seriously, you wouldn't say thats ok, would you?

You would not say "oh well, thats the price we pay for being able to seek justice". No, the punishment doesn't fit the crime - since there wasn't any crime. Nor would it be "justice".

I believe you would change your tune if you recieved a lawsuit tomorrow, with you as the defendent, demanding three million dollars from you, based on an allegation that was meritless. Of course you'll have to hire a lawyer to defend yourself...and the money clock starts ticking and it won't get turned off until: (1) you settle. The plaintiff could decide to accept $2 million and be done with it - IF you agreed.That would make it go away. Or (2) fight it to the bitter end. But in doing so you rack up attorney fees of, lets say $80,000...AND you still have to convince a jury that you are innocent of all charges.

But remember what you yourself said "jurors think, why not, Mr Marcus Moneybags can afford it".... and award the poor plaintiff the $3,000,000 that he or she demanded. Now you're (probably) financially ruined.

No rational adult can be ok with that scenario. But it happens every day - oh sure the dollar amounts differ, but the concept is exactly the same.

A lawsuit is a stick-up with an ink pen, rather than a pistol. In many cases its simply legal extortion.

uomo_senza_nome says

Paraphrased: it's no mystery that there are a lot of ignorant, dumbed down and propaganda-believing people in America.

Case in point, those on this site who still try to argue that Obama was born in Kenya and that his birth certificate is fake.

http://patrick.net/?p=1210506#comment-811764

uomo_senza_nome says

Paraphrased: it's no mystery that there are a lot of ignorant, dumbed down and propaganda-believing people in America.

LOL!

http://www.youtube.com/embed/ycsgWZEri14

LOL no 2.

http://www.youtube.com/embed/avljgLu5I_Q

uomo_senza_nome says

Paraphrased: it's no mystery that there are a lot of ignorant, dumbed down and propaganda-believing people in America.

Propaganda No. 1

Ratigan Goes Nuts: Accuses Tea Party People who Want to 'Kill Blacks and Jews'

http://www.youtube.com/embed/IuY0MMIpB4E

Propaganda No 2. Chris Matthews

During MSNBC's coverage of the Potomac primary, Matthews had this to say about then presidential candidate Barack Obama:“

I have to tell you, you know, it's part of reporting this case, this election, the feeling most people get when they hear Barack Obama's speech. My, I felt this thrill going up my leg. I mean, I don't have that too often.”

This led some on the political right to assert that both he and MSNBC were biased toward Obama.

On November 6, 2008, he was a guest on the MSNBC television program Morning Joe, where he stated, "I want to do everything I can to make this thing work, this new presidency work." Host Joe Scarborough asked if that was his job as a journalist. "Yeah, that’s my job. My job is to help this country," Matthews said.

On December 1, 2009, preceding Obama's speech announcing a troop increase in Afghanistan, Matthews critiqued the president for choosing the United States Military Academy as his venue, referring to it as "the enemy camp." Soon after, Matthews apologized for his remarks saying, "[To] the cadets, their parents, former cadets, and everyone who cares about this country and those who defend it: I used the wrong words and worse than that I said something that is just not right and for that I deeply apologize."

Chris Matthews defends the terrorist William Ayers and misquotes him..

He thinks that there is a difference in values between an anti-war bomber and an anti-black pro Klan bomber. So according to Chris, it is OK to set bombs and possibly kill people, or not OK but in Matthews mind you are better than a KKK bomber because they are racist.

http://www.youtube.com/embed/kiDRZna9ros&feature=player_embedded#!

what Bill Ayers actually said

”I don’t regret setting bombs,” Bill Ayers said. ”I feel we didn’t do enough.” — from No Regrets for a Love Of Explosives, New York Times, September 11, 2001

Honest Abe says

Marcus, you're right "it happens all the time". Right again: "the jurors think why not, they can afford it".

Yes, this is usually with insurance companies of corporations or corporations themselves. The cases where it's unfair can be appealed (although that costs legal fees). And they won't likely get so lucky in the jury selection process twice in a row.

Most of the time, the damages or settlements are deserved. So I would still argue the imperfections are simply the cost of the system. Look at fracking which can damage the water table of surrounding areas. Without the potential of litigation, what's to keep drillers from doing terrible damage ?

It's not just about deserved compensation or damages in cases where individuals or entities are hurt. IT's about motivating decent behavior - by putting a higher cost on bad behavior.

uomo_senza_nome says

Honest Abe says

but why is it they are the only network to break revelant news stories when the mainstream media either ignores the story or buries it on page 23?

Honest Abe - you are destroying any ounce of credibility that you may have by defending FOX News.

Bullshit.

In this country, we use wealth as a primary measure of success. By that measure, you have to conclude Fox News has been VERY successful in accomplishing the goals Rupert Murdoch set out for it.

You MSNBC weenies can say you're better. I wonder if that's what Steve Burke was thinking when Comcast took over NBC Universal and the new org chart came from his office without Phil Griffin's name on it.

It seems to me the argument could be made that not only did Fox News help to shape public opinion on the healthcare bill, it has also carried its end of the log fairly well in getting Obama defeated in November. You just watch and see if that doesn't happen.

rootvg says

Bullshit.

Truth hurts. Live with it.

rootvg says

In this country, we use wealth as a primary measure of success.

Explains why USA had the largest housing bubble in the history of mankind, because after all wealth = debt in the modern economy.

rootvg says

By that measure, you have to conclude Fox News has been VERY successful in accomplishing the goals Rupert Murdoch set out for it.

Of course, they have been extremely successful in brainwashing people . Did I say they weren't successful? They're agenda pushers and extremely successful at that.

rootvg says

You MSNBC weenies can say you're better.

LOL I'm not. As this comment should clearly show.

rootvg says

In this country, we use wealth as a primary measure of success.

http://www.youtube.com/embed/ke9iShKzZmM

leo, ROTFL -- loved it.

What caused the housing bubble was: (1) the Fed's manipulation of interest rates to an artificially low rate, and (2) Carter's Community Investment Act, aided, abetted and exacerbated by Clinton to completely gut lending requirements and standards.

As a direct consequence, millions of non-qualified first time buyers entered the market, causing prices to skyrocket (supply and demand caused by CRA, combined with artificially low interest rates caused by the Fed). That sent ripples upwards, causing move up buyers (in all price ranges) and vacation home buyers to pay higher and higher prices, again due to supply and demand and artificially low interest rates.

That was the start of the feeding frenzy. It continued growing until it finally crumbled under its own weight.

Kind of what's happening with our own government...it'll continue to grow until it collapses under its own weight. It is unsustainable...but heck, lets not make any drastic changes, lets keep the status quo, and kick the can down the road some more, and let someone else deal with it. That seems to be the current mentality of both parties.

Ron Paul's Campaign for Liberty, its our only hope.

Try to not watch the news. I know it is very hard to resist because it is addictive in a way. But it's all propaganda, lies, and junk, and I believe it's very toxic to our health. I think the 24 hour news mania is one of the main reasons so many people are depressed and take anti- depressants. Who cares what all those pundits think? Your opinion is more valid than any of theirs because you're not a rotten paid shill.
Cancel cable if you dare and buy a season of Kung Fu to watch. You'll be much happier I think.

Zak - Great advice! Bravo. I think we get caught up in the drama of it all and it becomes obsessive.

What I want to guard against, for myself, is not to become complacent while the crazies are busy destroying our freedoms and our country. Good post.

rootvg says

Did you know MSNBC hasn't earned its cost of capital for years? Do you know what happens when an entity loses as much money for as long as MSNBC has? They had a format change about three years ago and I'm thinking there's either another one of those coming or maybe Comcast will simply sell it off. If they can't sell it off, they'll shut the doors.

That's the problem with "news" being a for-profit entity. The "truth" is reduced to "what gets the best ratings."

Ever see the South Park episode called "The Quest for Ratings"?

Then again, I don't really care for "state controlled" media either. Any news outlet can become propaganda.

I guess the only way to get anything close to "the truth" is to seek information from a variety of sources.

And don't forget the Battle of Homestead, PA:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homestead_Strike

It's what we call the news!
http://www.youtube.com/embed/3Q2EPKKVrqI

uomo_senza_nome says

Honest Abe says

but why is it they are the only network to break revelant news stories when the mainstream media either ignores the story or buries it on page 23?

Honest Abe - you are destroying any ounce of credibility that you may have by defending FOX News.

Though I think defending Fox is distracting, I don't think it "destroys" Abe's credibility. He could be pointing out an actual phenomena. News programs exist to sell cars. If Fox sells cars by sensationalizing random stories, and CBS (CIA Broadcasting Somnambulance) and NBC (N-B-See nuthin') sell cars by sensationalizing NYTimes stories, then Fox is more likely to randomly select something the other news programs find too politically offensive to use to sell Hondas vs. Fox trying to sell Roundup and trucks.

uomo_senza_nome says

Then they'd start to see that reality does indeed have a liberal bias ;).

Actually, the bias comes from diversity and sustainability and random moderation. Nature abhors a Spike (specialization) as much as it abhors a vacuum. Conservatism wants to preserve some kind of comfort zone by forcing everything out of that zone that it doesn't like and to accumulate all of the resources it can. Nature has myriad ways of cutting off the spikes and filling in holes. This broadening of connections and diversifying of resources and dependency (liberal bias) is frightening to the ego of anyone. So frightening, that we assign nature's random behaviors to an intentional god so that we can stop trying to find reasons for things that are simply not reasonable.
"In 1492, Columbus sailed the ocean blue.
In 1493, he stole everything he could see."
The Arawak version, where Columbus changes from a Liberal to a Conservative.

People fear. It's very plain to see. They fear for their families. They fear for themselves. It's not natural to fear. Fear spells dependance. If someone can hurt you usually it's financially. Childern fear as they are under the tutelage of parents.

Usually intimidation is enough and people will back off. Speaking and writting only in subtle terms. The fear remains. They stay put. Another words get back in your cage and stay there.

http://www.youtube.com/embed/LCgzX7vwlFk

Being clever in your "current" situation may not work. You may be in debt or get a bi-weekly paycheck. In that case your more than likely screwed. You can ignore all of this if you want. Notice people over the age of adulthood they "owe" no one they are maviricks and very independent. They are held down to by "legally" making them dependands. David Bowie had to be subtle or this song may have met the garbage monster. Its like saying. Yea ok we know. Get back in your cage and ignore it. Hes also saying to some get in the rat race debt rat and win. Well how TF can you win there? You can't. They never let you out of that one. Fractional in of itself measuring the cost of what you buy vs the labor or work to pay it off puts you in debt and consumption continually. Another words. You labor and work far to much for what your getting. 700 dollar TV set is a circut board that costs 35 dollars to make labor wise. You think someone would grow a fucking tomato and find out what its like not paying 2.80 a pound. Or get a cow and not pay 13 dollars a pound for steak. You can't your in the city. Don't think that wasn't a part of the plan. Your stuck. It's grovel or hit the soup kitchen for you. Another words you don't really know anything but dependance. You could go right over the mountains and start building a house on the weekends. Greenhouse etc. Instead of sitting home and jerking off cause they won't let you hop on something at work you want. Or if your married sitting their contented with your brood and your wife, because well you provided. Then it's back to the hell hole on Monday with your shine box. The weekends are nice except when they hit the "juice" because well you fucked up and you may get fired. Its nice to hit the switch on insensitive bastards. I guess. You wanted it so you gots it eat shit and suffer. It can get poured on in so many differnt ways. You'll look like a guy that got hit full in the face with a old clothes iron twenty times before you can even think up another way. Some things NEVER back off. Another words try to get clever see what that gets you. TIME TO TAKE IT DOWN.

Artimus Maxtor 10:5 Niner: Stop circling the airport. The Air traffic controller has gone to another field.

http://www.youtube.com/embed/bDKxUt9UkmU

Its not so much keeping things away from you peers. Which debt and a bi-weekly paycheck will lend itself to stumbling all over one another to shine the paper mans shoes. When it comes down to it they have absolutely no respect for people that grovel. They may be used to it of course. Ask yourself? Would you respect someone that you could push around very easily? That has to be a beggar living hand to mouth just hoping you don't take it all away from them? You might think ole Artimus is a mean S.O.B. Think again maybe Artimus dosen't like seeing people having to crawl for their supper.

Artimus Maxtor 2:6 Confucious says: Confucious get hit by phone book many time. Goofy, seeing double but still can find bed.

uomo_senza_nome says

If I were to say some big channel actually speaks closer to truth, that would be RT. (Russia Today).

http://www.youtube.com/embed/OQkXv08uL5c

RT: Russia's answer to Fox News. According to Al-Jazeera. Ain't this fun?

uomo_senza_nome says (quoting George Carlin)

My first rule: I don't believe anything that the Government tells me. And neither do I believe anything I'm told by the media, who, in the case of the Gulf War, functioned as little more than unpaid employees of the Defense Department, and who, most of the time, operate as unofficial public relations agency for the government and industry.
I don't believe in any of them. And I have to tell you, folks, I don't really believe very much in my country either. I don't get all choked up about yellow ribbons and American flags. I see them as symbols, and I leave them to the symbol-minded.

Carlin had the same view I've evolved into over time.

Here's Chomsky on Manufacturing Consent (mainstream media propaganda, intentional or not):

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5631882395226827730

uomo_senza_nome says

LOL I'm not surprised. Lauren Lyster's Capital Account show is quite educative IMHO. Recently she had Bill Black. She has also interviewed Reggie Middleton, Yves Smith, Janet Tavakoli, Edward Harrison - all very good analysts, but hardly ever appear in MSM.

Yeah, excellent stuff.

US MSM 'experts': Barry "Double Dipper" McCaffrey, David Gergen, Erin Brunett, Arthur Laffer, John Fund, Krauthammer, Cokey Kudlow, etc.

RT is hated because they have real guests who give a real diverse range of opinion, not just the usual Optimate line.

Auntiegrav says

He could be pointing out an actual phenomena. News programs exist to sell cars.

He was actually constructing a logical argument to prove that FOX News tells out relevant news stories while others don't. I don't think that's true.

I hate all mainstream news media, they are all propaganda. So my point is -- don't even bother defending them, because in your own words: "they sell cars".

Selling cars is not journalism it is manufacturing consent, IMHO.

Auntiegrav says

Actually, the bias comes from diversity and sustainability and random moderation.

Ah, much more nuanced Auntiegrav. Thanks! :)

Honest Abe says

What caused the housing bubble was: ... and (2) Carter's Community Investment Act, aided, abetted and exacerbated by Clinton to completely gut lending requirements and standards.

If this is the cause of the housing bubble, then how does it explain the following facts:

1) The UK housing bubble
2) The Australian housing bubble
3) The Canadian housing bubble
4) The Spanish housing bubble
5) The Greek housing bubble
6) The Fact that Deutche bank ended up as the largest landowner in Cleveland

How do these have anything to do with Community Investment Act? I don't disagree that government(s) were a significant problem, but this one detail, doesn't seems to have any positive or negative correlation to the problem. I might suggest you evaluate your own biases. I suggest the following three might be blinding you

A) You hate democrats and think everything is their fault
B) Nothing the government can do is good
C) You believe the poor and colored folks are the cause of America's problems.

Once you accept your biases, it will help you understand the world better.

P.S. I can agree that interest rates were probably part of the problem. But notice just part of the problem, there were other factors that complicated things.

oliverks1 says

I might suggest you evaluate your own biases.

Nailed it there, not just the problem with Honest Abe, with many others as well.

It is apparently very hard to suspend these biases for a minute and actually think.

We've seen a few shifts of the media in the past few decades

1) News reports have been cut down. Sound bites..you name it. Commercials are even smaller these days. No one airs a one minute commercial. These days a 30 second or even a 15 one is sold

2) International reporting post 2005ish has been dramatically cut. If something happens in the middle east these days they'll report about Israel from London...I'm freaking serious!

3) Nearly everything is dumbed down. TV news (especially network) is on a 6th grade reading level. Maybe the McCloughlin group would higher...Firing Line I'd say was higher..the best bet today would be Intelligence Squared which is on bloomberg sometimes

4) Is there a bias? Of course there is. First there is a bias that they won't bit the hand that feeds them. NBC never reported anything bad about GE when they were owned by them
http://www.youtube.com/embed/yHRMozyOVtk

4) We've in an environment where everyone wants to speak but no one wants to listen. On any given second at least 70 videos are uploaded to youtube.

I remember Nader said once that we really don't get local news anymore. A 30 minute block has say 8 minutes of commercials. The weather reported with a teaser, there's sports and then factor in anything violent that happened that day and there's really hardly anything. News networks repeat the same local news over but switch anchors..A network affiliate now repeats the same news for maybe 25-33% of what it airs every weekday.

here's an example of how some reporting has changed
http://www.youtube.com/embed/jkqaURe0ECQ
ABC News did a great job in looking at both sides and gave ample time. These days that's impossible..there's no way that can be done now.

Cloud says

You could bring media bias and/or liberal hypocriscy on a silver platter

I would be very interested in seeing data sets/studies that support the idea of a liberal media bias.

When I have looked into it in the past all studies on the topic show a pretty steady conservative bias in the media. NPR seems to be the closest to an unbiased moderate news source, and even it has been shown to have a slight conservative bias.

But, please if you have a study that "proves" a liberal media bias I would love to see their data and methodology!

Thanks in advance.

Cloud says

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2008/mar/18/right-underrepresented-in-presss-diversity/

Yeah I know I know .... "Pew Research is bullshit." It's just like Fox News.

Nothing in that link that indicates bias. I does not matter how individual's in a media organization identify themselves. I would be curious to see how the self-reporting demographics of FOX "news" if on a similar poll. I would not be surprised if many ranked themselves as independent or moderate.

What is the overall story output of a media organization?

Cloud says

Shall we start with Dan Rather and the phoney documents? [etc...]

In a sea of information there are plenty of individual examples of bias. This is what an organization like FOX latches onto, what they don't look at is the big picture.

Even with individual examples you cited when the messages of media organizations are looked at in their entirety it has never balanced to show a "liberal bias".

What I am looking for is not anecdotal evidence, but a comprehensive study that looks at the big picture. I don't want just one card, but I want to look at what is in the entire 9-deck boot.

I do however appreciate you response.