Down that road

This is a discussion thread · 20 replies
1 2 3
Charles Riggs:
In her press conference today with Jack Straw, the British Foreign Secretary (AmE: Secretary of State), Dr Rice said '...down that route'. Wrong, I thought. The expression is 'take that route' or 'down that road'. I reckon she realized her error, smart chick that she is, for a minute or less later, she used 'down this path'. Comments?

It was a most interesting session, with the Iran problem dominating it. I have a solution to it, by the way. If Iran would welcome newcomers Oops, wrong thread if Iran merely wants, as is totally reasonable, to develop a nuclear power program rather than to develop nuclear weapons, Dr Rice could recommend to her boss, that war-mongering head of state, that a good option would be to let Iran in on all the methodology needed to build nuclear power stations, thus relieving the country's leaders from having to assure Europe and the US it is not all that interested in bombing the *** out of Israel, as many people think.
Should anyone care, I watched the press conference on Maria's Fox News, America's most interesting news station and the one where thinking men and women in America go for their news when not reading The New York Times or when PBS is airing silly-assed programs about rebuilding one's house or flogging one's antiques, instead of presenting the McNair Neal Report, or whatever it's called.
Charles Riggs
There are no accented letters in my email address
This thread originates from within 'usenet', and as such the content and users are not guaranteed to have been moderated by our community.
Maria Conlon:
(deleted Iran idea, good though it may be)
[nq:1]Should anyone care, I watched the press conference on Maria's Fox News, America's most interesting news station and the one ... programs about rebuilding one's house or flogging one's antiques, instead of presenting the McNair Neal Report, or whatever it's called.[/nq]
McNeil/Lehrer. But I think it's The NewsHour with Jim Lehrer now.
Anyway: I've been watching Fox News for a long time. It seems to keep getting better and better. Good source.
But MSNBC is my 6 AM-to-9 AM (ET) channel that's when the "Imus in the Morning" radio program is shown, live. I'm not sure if it's shown (live or otherwise) on the west coast. He does some excellent interviews and also has a staff of good people. But mainly, the show is funny and irreverent. I love it.
Maria Conlon
This thread originates from within 'usenet', and as such the content and users are not guaranteed to have been moderated by our community.
John Wade:
[nq:1]Anyway: I've been watching Fox News for a long time. It seems to keep getting better and better. Good source. Fox News has so much spin, you could use it[/nq]
as a gyroscope in a rocket!!
It is the only channel I have blocked on my TV,
and here is the reason...
Fox is much like CBN (Christian Broadcast
Network), in that, if you are casually flipping the channels and come upon it, you might think
that it is real news, which, of course, it is not.

I don't watch Dan Rather for the same reason.
I want my news set out in front of me in a matter- of-fact way, so that I can put my own spin on it,
if that's my desire.
Of the major outlets, CNN and NBC are the
most even, with ABC being right leaning, and
CBS being left leaning. Fox is the most out of
kilter of the lot, being hard right.
Because of this, and the gullible people who
think they are watching real news, I believe
Fox News to be a dangerous entity.
Just my 2 cents.
John Wade
This thread originates from within 'usenet', and as such the content and users are not guaranteed to have been moderated by our community.
Martin Ambuhl:
[nq:1]Anyway: I've been watching Fox News for a long time. It seems to keep getting better and better. Good source.[/nq]
Because survey data is expensive to generate, there are rarely attempts to check to see if it can be replicated. There are exceptions, however. In particular, the early 2004 surveys of followers of various news sources were suspected of either having ideological bias or of using inappropriate questions. I know of four independent surveys, now, based on four completely different sets of easily checked news stories and they all, despite the expectations of the people conducting the later surveys, come to the same conclusions:

1) Regular watchers of Fox News, more than any other group, believethings that are simply untrue.

2) Regular watchers of Fox News, more than any other group, are muchmore confident that what they think to be true is true.

Whether this is because Fox News regularly lies which is well documented or because of some defect in the regular watchers of Fox News is left as an exercise for the reader.

"If you want to post a followup via groups.google.com, don't use the broken "Reply" link at the bottom of the article. Click on "show options" at the top of the article, then click on the "Reply" at the bottom of the article headers." - Keith Thompson
This thread originates from within 'usenet', and as such the content and users are not guaranteed to have been moderated by our community.
don groves:
[nq:1](deleted Iran idea, good though it may be)[/nq]
[nq:2]Should anyone care, I watched the press conference on Maria's ... of presenting the McNair Neal Report, or whatever it's called.[/nq]
[nq:1]McNeil/Lehrer. But I think it's The NewsHour with Jim Lehrer now.[/nq]
Yes, Robert MacNeil retired some years back. His autobiography "Wordstruck" (ISBN 0-14-010401-1) is a wonderful read, highly recommended to any AUEer.

dg (domain=ccwebster)
This thread originates from within 'usenet', and as such the content and users are not guaranteed to have been moderated by our community.
Aokay David G. Bryce:
[nq:2]Anyway: I've been watching Fox News for a long time. It seems to keep getting better and better. Good source.[/nq]
[nq:1]Because survey data is expensive to generate, there are rarely attempts to check to see if it can be replicated. ... or because of some defect in the regular watchers of Fox News is left as an exercise for the reader.[/nq]
I dunno, my man. Maria seems to have her head screwed on right.
This thread originates from within 'usenet', and as such the content and users are not guaranteed to have been moderated by our community.
Maria Conlon:
[nq:2]Anyway: I've been watching Fox News for a long time. It seems to keep getting better and better. Good source.[/nq]
[nq:1]Because survey data is expensive to generate, there are rarely attempts to check to see if it can be replicated. ... Fox News, more than any other group, are much more confident that what they think to be true is true.[/nq]
As you might suspect, I would want to know who conducted the surveys and who paid for them. I would also want to see the findings about other news sources. "Independent" may mean nothing.
Also: What things do watchers of Fox News believe that you (or the unnamed survey people) believe to be untrue? Things like 2+2=5 or things that are matters of opinion and perspective? What were the exact questions? And if the answers were chosen from a multiple-choice list, what were the given choices?
[nq:1]Whether this is because Fox News regularly lies which is well documented [/nq]
Cites? And who is doing the documentation?
[nq:1]..or because of some defect in the regular watchers of Fox News is left as an exercise for the reader.[/nq]
Well, this watcher of Fox News is insulted by your implication.

Why is it that so many left-leaners think they are so much smarter than anyone else? In my experience, that is simply not the case; they are just haughtier.
With no offense intended for the non-haughty,
Maria Conlon
This thread originates from within 'usenet', and as such the content and users are not guaranteed to have been moderated by our community.
Martin Ambuhl:
[nq:1]As you might suspect, I would want to know who conducted the surveys and who paid for them.[/nq]
This from someone who swallows the *** Fox dishes up.
[nq:1]I would also want to see the findings about other news sources. "Independent" may mean nothing.[/nq]
Your research skills are as poor as your discernment of news sources, are they?

"If you want to post a followup via groups.google.com, don't use the broken "Reply" link at the bottom of the article. Click on "show options" at the top of the article, then click on the "Reply" at the bottom of the article headers." - Keith Thompson
This thread originates from within 'usenet', and as such the content and users are not guaranteed to have been moderated by our community.
don groves:
[nq:2]Because survey data is expensive to generate, there are rarely ... confident that what they think to be true is true.[/nq]
[nq:1]As you might suspect, I would want to know who conducted the surveys and who paid for them. I would ... What were the exact questions? And if the answers were chosen from a multiple-choice list, what were the given choices?[/nq]
Back around election time is was widely reported, except on Fox News obviously, that more than half of all regular Fox watchers still believed such discredited things as: Saddam Hussein was connected to the 9/11 attacks; Iraq was harboring terrorists; Iraq had hidden WMDs; plus one other I can't remember at the moment.
You likely could find sources on Google or on newspaper web sites if you are interested in them.

dg (domain=ccwebster)
This thread originates from within 'usenet', and as such the content and users are not guaranteed to have been moderated by our community.
Show more
Live chat
Registered users can join here