Brian Williams scandal

[Y]

I enjoy annoying you!   

I work with some the most intelligent people in this state. Some of the top entrepreneurs, businessmen, architects, engineers, sales reps and nearly all of them are right wing minded people, so say whatever it takes to make you feel good about things, I know for a fact I am in good company.

If you think you 'annoy' me, you're mistaken.

You're also mistaken in thinking those are the "most intelligent people in the state" or that your business association with them somehow translates to your equality with them on any level.

You're also mistaken in thinking that it's a good thing, and something to admired and emulated, that they're RW. 

They're RW simply as an extension of their being capitalists.  If being for Divine Right would make them money, they'd be monarchists.  They're opportunists - no more, no less - and that's something hardly to be admired.

Do you enjoy being their lap dog?

[me]

Yes, you and your ilk are assuming a lot of things surrounding intention and motivation in this incident, and have appointed yourselves judge,jury, and executioner in the process. As others have said here before; There is no proof surrounding motivation and intention. . .

We're talking about Williams here, not Limbaugh. That you do not see the difference between the two is an example of exactly why Williams' situation is such a travesty.

My POTUS? Don't you mean "OUR" POTUS?

That statement right there is exactly one of the root causes for the situation Williams finds himself in today.

You racists have been stirring the pot for just short of a decade now with your vitriol, to the point where it is now infecting not just politics, but the very fabric of this nation. The level of accountability and punishment, for even the slightest transgressions, has gone off the scale of acceptability and well into the absurd, forcing the bleating sheep amongst the population to steadfastly hold onto the us verses them perspective in all things public and private.

That you can rationalize the whole thing by pointing to one man as the singular cause of the situation is beyond absurdity. 

Moreover, taking a WiKi posting as valid and truthful information, and using it to support your insidious position on Williams is a primary example of the laziness of you and your ilk. You take spoon fed information designed to evoke an emotional response from you as the unvarnished truth, then support it with even more conjecture without even a modicum of effort to look any further; focusing solely upon finding only that information that will support your position without regard to vetting of all available information prior to arriving at a decision or position on the matter.

One day each one of you will be subjected to the result of exactly the same methodology, and I dare say when it threatens your livelihood and family, you will be howling to the heavens about the unfairness of it all and about how you were wronged.  And I say this because as we all know, excrement runs downhill; and the standards once reserved for politicians and political candidates are now being used as the measure for an increasingly larger portion of humanity. One day it will be your turn. Perhaps even for something you posted herein. 

So doesn't that make the dems racist over what the said and did to Condi, Thomas, and some others who were in the Bush administration. Even Powell was a target before he defected. They were personal attacks not just a disagreement in policy. This racist crap is getting real old and is definitely a dem/lib talking point.

[Y]

So doesn't that make the dems racist over what the said and did to Condi, Thomas, and some others who were in the Bush administration. Even Powell was a target before he defected. They were personal attacks not just a disagreement in policy. This racist crap is getting real old and is definitely a dem/lib talking point.

What did the 'Dems' say and do to Condi, Thomas, et al?  No generalizations, be specific.

[Exterminator]

Oh yea, like NPR isn't biased.

Perhaps you should research it before you set off flapping your toothless gums about yet another subject about which you know nothing.  There is bias in all things but NPR is arguably the least biased among all news outlets.

Here are some examples from Robert Frost, an engineer at NASA:

Interviews/comments provided by Think Tank pundits

Every news outlet relies on expert commentators from think tanks to provide comments or to be interviewed.  Those think tanks include organizations such as American Enterprise, The Brookings Institute, and the Heritage Foundation.  A study in 2005 counted the number of commentators from conservative-leaning think tanks and the number of commentators from liberal-leaning think tanks.  The tally came to 249 conservatives and 141 liberals.  That means that 63.8% of the commentators from think tanks were conservatives.  So, NPR clearly is not trying to prevent conservative viewpoints from reaching its audience.

Stories about the Obama Administration

Pew did a study and found that 52% of stories on the administration were neutral, compared to a 40% average for the media in general.  28% of stories about the administration were positive, compared to 37% for the media in general.  So, NPR clearly is not trying to be the voice of the current Democrat administration.

Democrat and Republican Voices on the Fiscal Cliff Story

Another study looked at the audio clips played between Nov. 7 and Dec. 6 2012, concerning the Fiscal Cliff news story.  The count came to 94 Republican voices and 77 Democrat voices.  That means 54.9% of the audio clips of politicians providing their insight on the fiscal cliff came from Republicans.  So, NPR clearly is not trying to prevent conservative viewpoints from reaching its audience.

The Audience Makeup

The Wall Street Journal reported on surveys by Gfk MRI that measured political leanings of NPR's weekly audience:



I wonder if any other US news outlet has such an even distribution?

The one place that analysts have detected a liberal bias is in the range of stories covered - specifically, NPR covers stories that tend to be of more interest to people that describe themselves as center-left to left than center-right to right.  For example, 31% of NPR's stories are about international news - whereas for US commercial radio, 3% of the news stories are about international news. 

How NPR covers these stories does not demonstrate a bias, but the fact that they are covering them is deemed a bias, by some.

[Exterminator]

I work with some the most intelligent people in this state. Some of the top entrepreneurs, businessmen, architects, engineers, sales reps and nearly all of them are right wing minded people, so say whatever it takes to make you feel good about things, I know for a fact I am in good company.

LMFAO!  Now who's trying to inflate himself?  You should spread this shit to people who don't know where you work or what you do.

[me]

What did the 'Dems' say and do to Condi, Thomas, et al?  No generalizations, be specific.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/2484587/posts

[Exterminator]

What did the 'Dems' say and do to Condi, Thomas, et al?  No generalizations, be specific.

I hope you planned for this to be a rhetorical question because she will ignore the question rather than admit that she's full of shit.

[Palehorse]

I hope you planned for this to be a rhetorical question because she will ignore the question rather than admit that she's full of shit.

Or just plain provide validation of that fact. . . 

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/2484587/posts

[Exterminator]

Moreover, taking a WiKi posting as valid and truthful information, and using it to support your insidious position on Williams is a primary example of the laziness of you and your ilk. You take spoon fed information designed to evoke an emotional response from you as the unvarnished truth, then support it with even more conjecture without even a modicum of effort to look any further; focusing solely upon finding only that information that will support your position without regard to vetting of all available information prior to arriving at a decision or position on the matter.

Exactly!  Conservatives tend to be conclusion driven, starting with some assumption, often based on a religious interpretation initially, and then seek the information that they feel proves their point. Liberals at least try for some more objectivity than that because they tend to be better educated which teaches them to be less subjective.

[Exterminator]

Or just plain provide validation of that fact. . . 

LOL!  Wow...   

[Palehorse]

LOL!  Wow...   

You just cannot make this crap up! 

[Henry Hawk]

LMFAO!  Now who's trying to inflate himself?  You should spread this shit to people who don't know where you work or what you do.

Apparently you don't so don't lie and pretend you do....but then again I don't give a shit what you think.  I'm still laughing my ass off on how this whole thing is frying your ass off!   

[Exterminator]

Apparently you don't so don't lie and pretend you do....but then again I don't give a shit what you think.  I'm still laughing my ass off on how this whole thing is frying your ass off!   

Don't flatter yourself...why would it "fry my ass off" for you to prove you're stupid when I already knew that?

[Henry Hawk]

In all seriousness, I am laughing harder than I have in a long time!

It amazes me how mean you guys try to be!  I can care Less!  I will have NO ramifications from one single word I have ever written on here.  Nada, zilch!  It makes me happy to see ex waste so much time trying to defend someone who IS wrong!

Every time he throws one of his wanna be smart ass remarks, it only confirms that I am right and he is wrong!

Fun day!

[Exterminator]

...it only confirms that I am right and he is wrong!