"Scare for profit" model?  Please elaborate.

This is a circular argument that has been had many many times over what with demonizing poor, muslims, war on christmas, war on christians etc.. Preying on the fears of the base. Conservatives don't agree with that position so this argument is pointless to have with. 

---

You do know that the "Fairness" Doctrine pretty much amounts to a "state controlled media" right?

Of course it is. I am sure you can elaborate on this conspiracy. 

---

Actually CNN and huffpo is more popular on the internet than FoxNews.  (Going by Alexa)

 

The Liberal Media fails where the Conservative Media succeeds because the Liberal Media isn't as good as stirring up fears.  Aside from Shepard Smith, most anchors on Fox do nothing but stir up fear and use emotion to gain an audience.  It's also an age issue of course.  Liberals are younger, Conservatives are older.  That's why conservatives are more likely to get their news from television than from the internet (that doesn't mean conservatives don't just that many of them don't.)


Stir up outrage, and you get ratings.  Both sides get outraged at things, though I'd say conservatives tend to get outraged about the same things, while Liberals tend to branch out more.  One group of Liberals might be outraged at the Michael Brown shooting, while another group might think it justified.  On the other hand, most conservatives get outraged when someone brings up gun control. I'd say conservatives are more focused on preventing negative outcomes (thus it's easier to stir up outrage over)  while liberals are more focused on creating positive outcomes (thus harder to stir up outrage over

 

First of all, huffpo is not a news site.  It's one of the dreaded "blogs" where readers can post often offensive remarks.

 

Conservative media "stirs up fears"?  That's new to me.  The conservative media that I watch, listen to or read on the internet simply reports the story with factual data.

 

Once again, as liberals often do, you stereotype people by saying that "liberals are younger and conservatives are older".  That is outright false for the most part.  There are several liberals in my age group ("older") as well as several younger conservatives.  Next you are going to tell me that conservatives are all "mostly old white people".

 

The reason that most conservatives get outraged when the issue of gun control is brought up is because most conservatives have read and believe in our founding documents.

 

In general, I would suggest that conservatives are more positive and optimistic when it comes to our people.  Liberals on the other hand tend to think in terms that are more socialist and/or communist.

---

There are 10 kinds of people in this world.  Those who understand binary and those who don't.

First of all, huffpo is not a news site.  It's one of the dreaded "blogs" where readers can post often offensive remarks.

 

Conservative media "stirs up fears"?  That's new to me.  The conservative media that I watch, listen to or read on the internet simply reports the story with factual data.

 

Once again, as liberals often do, you stereotype people by saying that "liberals are younger and conservatives are older".  That is outright false for the most part.  There are several liberals in my age group ("older") as well as several younger conservatives.  Next you are going to tell me that conservatives are all "mostly old white people".

 

The reason that most conservatives get outraged when the issue of gun control is brought up is because most conservatives have read and believe in our founding documents.

 

In general, I would suggest that conservatives are more positive and optimistic when it comes to our people.  Liberals on the other hand tend to think in terms that are more socialist and/or communist.

 

And I just got the response I was looking for.


Conservatives (as they often do) demonize liberals.  They resort to namecalling (and then say it's not namecalling).  They aren't more positive and optimistic about our people.  Otherwise why would they be concerned about pedophilia becoming legal if we legalize gay marriage?  Or why would they be concerned guns would be outright banned if we have gun control?  Even Ronald Reagan supported an assault weapon ban.  If they were so optimistic, why would they have feared Ebola, when so few people contracted it?  


Shepard Smith put it well when he said it wasn't a time to panic regarding Ebola.  Yet, that's what most of the rest of Fox News supported:  Panicing.  Ebola is going to kill you.  

---

I was wrong about Trent Baalke. 

Also I'd say Fox News isn't a news channel.  They don't deliver news, it's just filled with nothing but Pundits (and Shepard Smith)  And there's plenty of offensive comments on Fox News site.  In fact many of their pundits say offensive things!

---

I was wrong about Trent Baalke. 

And I just got the response I was looking for.


Conservatives (as they often do) demonize liberals.  They resort to namecalling (and then say it's not namecalling).  They aren't more positive and optimistic about our people.  Otherwise why would they be concerned about pedophilia becoming legal if we legalize gay marriage?  Or why would they be concerned guns would be outright banned if we have gun control?  Even Ronald Reagan supported an assault weapon ban.  If they were so optimistic, why would they have feared Ebola, when so few people contracted it?  


Shepard Smith put it well when he said it wasn't a time to panic regarding Ebola.  Yet, that's what most of the rest of Fox News supported:  Panicing.  Ebola is going to kill you.  

 

 

Also I'd say Fox News isn't a news channel.  They don't deliver news, it's just filled with nothing but Pundits (and Shepard Smith)  And there's plenty of offensive comments on Fox News site.  In fact many of their pundits say offensive things!

 

So can you explain to me how I "demonized" liberals or resorted to "name calling"?  I assume your "name calling" is my remark about liberals tending to be of the socialist/communist mind set.  That is simply a fact.

 

True conservative people are more optimistic.  One of my favorite quotes is on Ronald Reagan's tombstone.  It reads "I know in my heart that man is good, that what is right will always eventually triumph, and there is purpose and worth to each and every life".  Conservatives believe in the greatness of the American People.  Liberals on the other hand hate the terms "American Greatness" or "American Exceptionalism".  They tend to think that we should be "equal", much like Europe, hence the terms "equal pay" and "income equality" and "wealth distribution".  I hate to break it to you, but those terms are very socialistic and communist.

 

The far right wing does not want the definition of marriage being altered, that between a woman and a man.  While I personally disagree with the viewpoint, it does leave something to consider.  If the very definition changes, who is to say that it would or would not change for other lifestyles?  I haven't heard anything like pedophilia, but what about bigamy?  Should a man (or woman) be allowed to have several wives?

 

Can you cite or link to any sources where FOX News "incited panic" regarding the Ebola situation?  I wonder how many of the "other" news organizations reported on it?

 

Finally, FOX News does report the news.  While "prime time" is filled with "opinion shows", for the most part, it's hard news.  Please give reference to how any of the "pundits" make "offensive" remarks.  I can show you plenty of examples where "anchors" or "pundits" of all of the liberal channels have made "offensive" remarks.  Do a google search on how the President Bush Administration was referred to in the media.  Then look and see how many times FOX News anchors or commentators have used the same language to refer to President Obama or even President Clinton.

---

There are 10 kinds of people in this world.  Those who understand binary and those who don't.

Fox has perfected the scare for profit model. The left has not. 

I would say the left does fine in that department.

 

"They are gonna take away your social security"

"They want more guns in the hands of criminals"

"They are gonna take away your welfare and food stamps"

"ect, ect, ect..."

---

Original Season Ticket Holder - Retired  1995 - 2020


At some point you just have to let go of what you thought should happen and live in what is happening.
 

And I just got the response I was looking for.


Conservatives (as they often do) demonize liberals.  They resort to namecalling (and then say it's not namecalling).  They aren't more positive and optimistic about our people.  Otherwise why would they be concerned about pedophilia becoming legal if we legalize gay marriage?  Or why would they be concerned guns would be outright banned if we have gun control?  Even Ronald Reagan supported an assault weapon ban.  If they were so optimistic, why would they have feared Ebola, when so few people contracted it?  


Shepard Smith put it well when he said it wasn't a time to panic regarding Ebola.  Yet, that's what most of the rest of Fox News supported:  Panicing.  Ebola is going to kill you. 

You know nothing John Snow.  

 

In a nut shell conservatives believe in the individual.  It is up to me the individual to take care of me and mine.

 

In a nut shell liberals believe that the individual can't take care of himself and needs the assistance to government to do so.

 

Everything else after these two points is white noise.

---

Original Season Ticket Holder - Retired  1995 - 2020


At some point you just have to let go of what you thought should happen and live in what is happening.
 

You must agree that Liberal bias is far more prevalent simply because they control the academia, media, the publishing houses, and Hollywood.

This is one of the biggest lies of all politics.


Who controls the media? Comcast, Disney, Rupert, etc... these corporate owners of news outlets control the message. They are all far more conservative and pro big business than liberal. To think otherwise shows a lack of understanding of the world you live in.


Example, how much play does Bernie Sanders get on any outlet? Little.


Even on the so called liberal outlets, he's dismissed as not a true candidate with no chance of winning.


Its so obvious...

---

You realize that "media" encompasses more than just tv.

You realize that liberal on social issues does not mean that media is liberal on economic issues, right?

---

You know nothing John Snow.


In a nut shell conservatives believe in the individual. It is up to me the individual to take care of me and mine.


In a nut shell liberals believe that the individual can't take care of himself and needs the assistance to government to do so.


Everything else after these two points is white noise.

No offense, but what you believe of so called liberals sounds exactly like the propaganda being shoveled out on radio and tv.


It appears to me that you bought that nonsense without thinking for yourself...

---

This is one of the biggest lies of all politics.

Who controls the media? Comcast, Disney, Rupert, etc... these corporate owners of news outlets control the message. They are all far more conservative and pro big business than liberal. To think otherwise shows a lack of understanding of the world you live in.

Example, how much play does Bernie Sanders get on any outlet? Little.

Even on the so called liberal outlets, he's dismissed as not a true candidate with no chance of winning.

Its so obvious...

If you think the coverage of a crank like Sanders is indicative of who controls the media then I cant really help you, you're lost inside your own head. That people believe Sanders' ideas are actually good shows a complete lack of understanding of history, human nature, and capability.

---

“An empty vessel makes the loudest sound, so they that have the least wit are the greatest babblers.”. - Plato

No offense, but what you believe of so called liberals sounds exactly like the propaganda being shoveled out on radio and tv.


It appears to me that you bought that nonsense without thinking for yourself...

That was a pretty terrible generalization.

---

I would say the left does fine in that department.

 

"They are gonna take away your social security"

"They want more guns in the hands of criminals"

"They are gonna take away your welfare and food stamps"

"ect, ect, ect..."

Oh for sure both sides sling mud. The right is just much better at the fear for profit model. 

---

If you think the coverage of a crank like Sanders is indicative of who controls the media then I cant really help you, you're lost inside your own head. That people believe Sanders' ideas are actually good shows a complete lack of understanding of history, human nature, and capability.

One of my biggest problems with the basis of conservative ideology at the top of it's pyramid, in a nut shell, is "I know I am selfish and greedy therefore everyone else must be" This is obviously not the case. It's ok to do for others in a manner that benefits society and to demonize that thought process is well, very selfish and greedy. 

---

So can you explain to me how I "demonized" liberals or resorted to "name calling"?  I assume your "name calling" is my remark about liberals tending to be of the socialist/communist mind set.  That is simply a fact.

 

True conservative people are more optimistic.  One of my favorite quotes is on Ronald Reagan's tombstone.  It reads "I know in my heart that man is good, that what is right will always eventually triumph, and there is purpose and worth to each and every life".  Conservatives believe in the greatness of the American People.  Liberals on the other hand hate the terms "American Greatness" or "American Exceptionalism".  They tend to think that we should be "equal", much like Europe, hence the terms "equal pay" and "income equality" and "wealth distribution".  I hate to break it to you, but those terms are very socialistic and communist.

 

The far right wing does not want the definition of marriage being altered, that between a woman and a man.  While I personally disagree with the viewpoint, it does leave something to consider.  If the very definition changes, who is to say that it would or would not change for other lifestyles?  I haven't heard anything like pedophilia, but what about bigamy?  Should a man (or woman) be allowed to have several wives?

 

Can you cite or link to any sources where FOX News "incited panic" regarding the Ebola situation?  I wonder how many of the "other" news organizations reported on it?

 

Finally, FOX News does report the news.  While "prime time" is filled with "opinion shows", for the most part, it's hard news.  Please give reference to how any of the "pundits" make "offensive" remarks.  I can show you plenty of examples where "anchors" or "pundits" of all of the liberal channels have made "offensive" remarks.  Do a google search on how the President Bush Administration was referred to in the media.  Then look and see how many times FOX News anchors or commentators have used the same language to refer to President Obama or even President Clinton.

 

I've never heard a conservative use the term 'socialist' solely as a factual term, and not as an intended insult.


And liberals aren't really socialist, they're just more socialist than conservatives.  They want more equality, not complete equality. We want the income equality to be more managable, and thus have a healthier middle class.  I'd hope we can both agree that the middle class is disappearing.  


As for the definition of marriage.. that's not really a good reason to deny gays the right to get married.  I attended my best friend's lesbian wedding two weeks ago.  She and her now wife had been dating for 12 years (and were engaged, even though they couldn't get married they were considering moving to somewhere where they could, for about 4 years).  Marriage has changed a lot over the years.  Women used to be considered property. And girls used to get married very young.  To see one of my closest friends finally be able to marry the love of her life was nice, and denying people that based on the fact that other people disagree with it because of <i>their</i> religion just does not sit right with me.   It's like saying "If we give women the vote, who's going to want to vote next?  Dogs?"  I'm just glad they were able to get married without moving.  Because she's practically family, and my daughters consider her an Aunt.  She doesn't want to marry multiple people, so I don't see why she shouldn't be given the right to marry the one person she loves just because others might want to.



I doubt I could find any links that would satisfy you.


Sure, Liberal media insults people too.  I never suggested otherwise.  That's why I don't watch the liberal news channels.  They're not really 'news' either.  I wouldn't watch Rachel Maddow anymore than I would Bill O'Reilly.

 

---

I was wrong about Trent Baalke. 

One of my biggest problems with the basis of conservative ideology at the top of it's pyramid, in a nut shell, is "I know I am selfish and greedy therefore everyone else must be" This is obviously not the case. It's ok to do for others in a manner that benefits society and to demonize that thought process is well, very selfish and greedy.

It's fine for you to do what your like with your money. To say what I must do with mine is far more greedy and selfish. You place your desires for my wealth above mine. And then have the gaul to call it compassion and chastize me for not wanting to go along with it. The foundation of modern liberalism is "everything belongs to me whether you like it or not."


But conservatives are greedy. Right, give me a break.

---

“An empty vessel makes the loudest sound, so they that have the least wit are the greatest babblers.”. - Plato

It's fine for you to do what your like with your money. To say what I must do with mine is far more greedy and selfish. You place your desires for my wealth above mine. And then have the gaul to call it compassion and chastize me for not wanting to go along with it. The foundation of modern liberalism is "everything belongs to me whether you like it or not."


But conservatives are greedy. Right, give me a break.

Not all, but some certainly are. I did say at the top after all.  

 

That's your interpretation of it. It is not the interpretation of the liberals that espouse it. It is more along the lines of aiding to the betterment of society. The same society that enabled you to make the life you wanted in the first place. Continuing the cycle over and over would be very good for future generations and I feel it's our duty to do. 

 

You feel it's not. That's fine. 

---

I've never heard a conservative use the term 'socialist' solely as a factual term, and not as an intended insult.


And liberals aren't really socialist, they're just more socialist than conservatives.  They want more equality, not complete equality. We want the income equality to be more managable, and thus have a healthier middle class.  I'd hope we can both agree that the middle class is disappearing.  


As for the definition of marriage.. that's not really a good reason to deny gays the right to get married.  I attended my best friend's lesbian wedding two weeks ago.  She and her now wife had been dating for 12 years (and were engaged, even though they couldn't get married they were considering moving to somewhere where they could, for about 4 years).  Marriage has changed a lot over the years.  Women used to be considered property. And girls used to get married very young.  To see one of my closest friends finally be able to marry the love of her life was nice, and denying people that based on the fact that other people disagree with it because of <i>their</i> religion just does not sit right with me.   It's like saying "If we give women the vote, who's going to want to vote next?  Dogs?"  I'm just glad they were able to get married without moving.  Because she's practically family, and my daughters consider her an Aunt.  She doesn't want to marry multiple people, so I don't see why she shouldn't be given the right to marry the one person she loves just because others might want to.



I doubt I could find any links that would satisfy you.


Sure, Liberal media insults people too.  I never suggested otherwise.  That's why I don't watch the liberal news channels.  They're not really 'news' either.  I wouldn't watch Rachel Maddow anymore than I would Bill O'Reilly.

 

 

Usually using the term "socialist" or "communist" is a fact.  When I use those terms, it is not meant as an insult.

 

Universal healthcare?  Single payer system?  Those are communist/socialist points of view.

 

What about when Maxine Waters came out and said that she would want to socialize have the government take over and run the oil companies?

 

Regarding the gay marriage issue, as I said before, I don't necessarily agree with the far right's assumptions, but I understand their reasoning and logic.  I've stated before that I don't have a problem with gays getting married legally for legal reasons.  What I don't want to see is churches or ordained ministers being forced to perform marriage ceremonies.  I personally have a brother who is gay as well as a cousin who is gay.  Both have been with their significant others for several years.  It wouldn't bother me and I would attend a ceremony should either of them decide to get married.

 

So you do say that FOX News supposedly was pushing "panic" when it comes to the Ebola situation, yet you have no resource to back it up.  Many on the left parrot the "FOX News is bad" talking points, but yet they don't ever watch the channel or browse the website.

---

There are 10 kinds of people in this world.  Those who understand binary and those who don't.

If you think the coverage of a crank like Sanders is indicative of who controls the media then I cant really help you, you're lost inside your own head. That people believe Sanders' ideas are actually good shows a complete lack of understanding of history, human nature, and capability.

There are polls that show that the majority of Americans believe in the policies Bernie is touting. The fact that you don't see it kinda proves my point... the fact that you call him a crank also proves my point. The economically conservative media fear him. As they should.


Also, your interpretation of history is flawed, in my opinion.

---