Predicto Posted March 5, 2007 Share Posted March 5, 2007 Hog, I'm not defending anything. I do not know how servicemen and women feel about this issue, I do not know if CBS was right or wrong, heck - I don't even know what CBS said in its story. What I do know is that when a news service receives 1400 letters about anything, that is a lot of letters. People just don't write that many letters very often about anything. Plus, the fact that other servicemen didn't write to CBS doesn't mean they agree or disagree. It means that they didn't write to CBS. You can't read anything else into it. So please stop saying that I am defending .1 percent against a 99.9 percent majority, or anything like that, because it isn't true. I take no position on the underlying issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Winslowalrob Posted March 6, 2007 Share Posted March 6, 2007 Hog, I'm not defending anything. I do not know how servicemen and women feel about this issue, I do not know if CBS was right or wrong, heck - I don't even know what CBS said in its story.What I do know is that when a news service receives 1400 letters about anything, that is a lot of letters. People just don't write that many letters very often about anything. Plus, the fact that other servicemen didn't write to CBS doesn't mean they agree or disagree. It means that they didn't write to CBS. You can't read anything else into it. So please stop saying that I am defending .1 percent against a 99.9 percent majority, or anything like that, because it isn't true. I take no position on the underlying issue. Word. To those of you who do NOT know, the written letter is one of the most effective means of conveying any position. Why? Because they show a significant effort on the part of the writer. People do not listen to written letters because they are the easiest medium to communicate with, they listen to written letters because of their relative rarity compared to emails and phone calls. Try contacting a news station or a congressmen without using written letters and see what happens. If 99.9% of the troops were happy with Iraq, as some are suggesting, why are 56% of the troops supporting the war? Wait, thats a loaded bullcrap question. It is foolish to use such juvenile comparisons, so quit trying. I find the Fox News stuff amusing because you have to ask what are they supposed to be? The conservative alternative to legit news? The conservative alternative to wack news? The conservative E! Television? Perhaps all three? It is not that the major news networks ain't pumpin out what I consider news worth reading (I wish we were bombarded by news about Darfur, but African suffering doesn't measure up to tits I guess;) ), we all know that, it is that Fox News is a major news network and it pumps out news not worth reading as well. Good show conservative conspiracy people! You have managed to create your own network and it is perhaps even more vapid than the supposed liberal alternatives! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chomerics Posted March 6, 2007 Share Posted March 6, 2007 Or that they're not upset enough to do something as painfully simple as writing a letter, yes.If one-tenth-of-one percent of people complaining is "pretty significant," then I can assure you that by your logic nothing in the world is going right. Nothing. You obviously are not well adept at discerning sociological behaviors then. Hint: if 1400 people actually take the time to write a letter, that stands for a much higher % of people that share that opinion. Just thought I would point out the obvious flaw in your argument. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chomerics Posted March 6, 2007 Share Posted March 6, 2007 On the other hand, it's generally a rule of thumb that the number of calls and letters received needs to be multiplied by a factor of ten (I don't remember the exact average) because most people who feel a certain way do not actually write or call-in. Shhhh, lets not let the truth out Burgold. One more thing, how many have sent letters to CBS supporting the war? Could I then use the same argument that only 10 letters approve of things so only .01% approve of the war? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeterMP Posted March 6, 2007 Share Posted March 6, 2007 Murdoch does not care if people learn anything. He just wants to make money, and hiring people with an education and integrity cost more money than uneducated hacks so if he can get the world to watch garbage and believe they are benefitting from it then he's happy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chomerics Posted March 6, 2007 Share Posted March 6, 2007 Wow. This is unbelievable. I hope no one on here ever calls me a partisan hack again. If you guys can defend your position against a 99.9% majority, you can defend anything. You are not defending it against 99.9% of the majorioty :doh: Remove the blinders to see the truth! ***edit*** And BTW, 56% of the troops surveyed in the Military Times poll also want to see troop levels the same or higher than they are now. Remember, this is a survey of people who have been deployed to Iraq already, or likely will be in the future. God bless them for standing up to this. That is good??? Are you freaking kidding me??? Barely 1 out of 2 wants more troops??? That is a HORRIBLE number, it should be in the high 90's, and you are spinning it as "good" :doh: Man, you complain about not wanting to be called a partisan hack, yet your posts leave nothing to defend you with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chomerics Posted March 6, 2007 Share Posted March 6, 2007 I still maintain that if you reverse the issues (use any liberal topic), reverse the parties and reverse the news channels (Fox instead of CBS) the left would be crying foul all day. That is where you are wrong, and it is what you still need to understand about politics and liberals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chomerics Posted March 6, 2007 Share Posted March 6, 2007 You're right about the source, it's one of Chommie favorites Too bad I've only visited it maybe 10 times in my life Der Fuhrer And it's not like they were the only ones Thank God she's in the ground already Apparently you miss the connection between hushing up real news because it pants the republicans in a bad light, and flooding the network with Anna Nicole stories. . .but I don't expect you to make that connection, it would actually require gray matter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sarge Posted March 6, 2007 Share Posted March 6, 2007 Too bad I've only visited it maybe 10 times in my life Der FuhrerApparently you miss the connection between hushing up real news because it pants the republicans in a bad light, and flooding the network with Anna Nicole stories. . .but I don't expect you to make that connection, it would actually require gray matter. And as I said before, Walter Reed has been a **** hole for 20 years, including Klinton's tenure. So much so it's on the BRAC list. So now we'll spend a buttload of money to make the place look pretty............................then close it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Midnight Judges Posted March 6, 2007 Share Posted March 6, 2007 I once asked John Gibson why he exaggerates everything and to his credit, he admitted he does it for the drama. The Anna Nicole Smith coverage reflects poorly on everyone involved IMO. FOX news, it's audience of lemmings, and our society as a whole. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimmySmith Posted March 6, 2007 Share Posted March 6, 2007 Apparently you miss the connection between hushing up real news because it pants the republicans in a bad light, and flooding the network with Anna Nicole stories. . .but I don't expect you to make that connection, it would actually require gray matter.Please define reference (as stated on the website). If you cannot, then you are yet again caught up in a non-story about a non-story. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riggo-toni Posted March 6, 2007 Share Posted March 6, 2007 Obviously this Walter guy you speak of didn't have great implants or take a high protein shake from a half dead gazillionaire, so why should he even be on the news at all.... duh! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Midnight Judges Posted March 6, 2007 Share Posted March 6, 2007 Obviously this Walter guy you speak of didn't have great implants or take a high protein shake from a half dead gazillionaire, so why should he even be on the news at all.... duh! :laugh: post of the day! :logo: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beaudry Posted March 6, 2007 Share Posted March 6, 2007 The only news station that I get is CNN and Larry King has Anna Nicole stuff on every single day. It's pathetic and sad that the American public cares about this stuff. My wife reads "Us" magazine, and that absolutely drives me crazy. Thread starter deserves a big kick in the privates for the headline that was obviously meant to get a rise out of republicans. This isn't about Fox News, it is about all the news agencies and the idiotic American public who watches this stuff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
@DCGoldPants Posted March 6, 2007 Share Posted March 6, 2007 I think its just obvious that Fox hates the Troops and America. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.