The Usurper:So what.

Artful Dodger: "so what"

So your adopted favorite source of information plays deceptive games with the minds of the public, that's what. This includes Fox News. I don't deny that so does CNN, MSNBC, etc.

Seems pretty important to me.

The Usurper:Duh Greg.  I don't consider Prison break or The Simpsons a major source of information.  Give me a break.  I couldn't care less about your meaningless suggestion here.  This all coming from someone who gets his 911 information from Rosie ODonnell. 

Artful Dodger: "This all coming from someone who gets his 911 information from Rosie ODonnell."

Cute. But you DO use Fox News as a major source of information, correct? That would include Hannity & O'Reilly, among others. You think Murdoch pulls the strings on Fox entertainment for political purposes, then leaves Fox news alone?

The Usurper:No I don't

Artful Dodger: I'm glad to hear that. Now if I could convince my liberal friends to stop getting their news from MSNBC, we might get somewhere.

The Usurper:It's illogical to assume that just because a show like Family Man contains positive messages supporting global warming that somehow this attitude bleeds over to the hard news.

And when you can read minds then, and only then, you will be able to tell me the motives behind Fox Executives.  Otherwise, you simply have an opinion and as I've already stated, opinions don't add up to facts. 

Artful Dodger: "It's illogical to assume that just because a show like Family Man contains positive messages supporting global warming that somehow this attitude bleeds over to the hard news."

Why is this illogical? At the top, you have one man (Murdoch) owning both.

In the article itself, there is this sentence: "In 2003, Rupert Murdoch himself admitted that the corporation had “tried” to help the Bush administration sell the war in Iraq."

And embedded within this sentence is a another link, to this:

Murdoch Admits He Tried to Shape Public Opinion on Iraq

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JF9HpuZm6-g

How did he try to shape public opinion? Why, through programming, whether entertainment or news. He utilized the means at his command. What can be simpler than this?

The Usurper:  I'm not going to defend Fox or any other cable network.  Think what you want about them.  As I've said, I couldn't care less about this theory of yours.  It's meaningless to me.  I don't get my news from Fox.  I get it from many sources and I am a skeptic at heart.  I don't believe everything I read or hear.

Some people on this form like to generalize and tell people what they are thinking.  Some like to twist words or create caricatures of others.  Some of  the things you say are a passive form of insulting.  Some not so passive.  "Some of us don't distain truth."  That is an arrogant statement.  When you make these kinds of statements, I just start ignoring you and I certainly don't take what you  say with any degree of seriousness. 

One of the most effective ways to get someone to consider your view, is to put a stone in their shoe.  The reason I don't buy global warming is I had a stone (of doubt) put in my shoe.  I am not a conspiracy theorist but there are some things about 911 that just don't add up for me.  Again, stone in the shoe.  I don't think the Republican party is always right.  But I hold strongly to conservative views and think that our country is better off run from conservative principles.  Still, I have some democratic congressmen that I respect.  I like Alan Combes now that he's off with Hannity.  He's so much better as a Fox News Contributor.  He brings a different view to the issues and he articulates them well.  I also like Dr. Marc Lamont Hill.  He's pretty much a Left kind of guy.  But he's brillant and gives excellent reasons for his views.  He's a regular on Fox.  He NEVER agress with the conservative viewpoints.  That's why I like watching Fox.  I know of MANY left leaning political commentators that are regulars on Fox. 

To my knowledge, neither Homer or Bart has appeared on a Fox news program for their views on anything.

Artful Dodger: My comment to Czuch about not disdaining truth was apropos, and frankly meant to be insulting, because of the way he himself insinuates insults into his specious statements. "Answer a fool according to his folly." Czuch hits below the belt at times, so I return the favor. You ought to be able to see this.

That you are a skeptic at heart is very healthy. So am I. And because you and I both, though we disagree on many issues, nevertheless DO have an interest in obtaining to the truth, on whatever topic, wherever the evidence may lead, there is hope for us both. Czuch has a taller hill to climb, in my opinion. He resorts to ridicule more often than he tries to articulate a point. To my knowledge, he does no private research on any of these issues, nor does he appear to lose an ounce of sleep over matters of the greatest importance.

So...there is the rationale for my different approaches to debate. I'm not perfect, but it's like a wrestling match...you have to think on your feet.

The Usurper:Czuch never bothers me.  Fortunately, I agree with just about everything he says.  And more often than not, he's very diplomatic.  His other stuff is simply Czuchisms and should be taken as such.  He doesn't disdain truth any more than you or I.  He cherishes it. 

But easy for me to say since I like the guy and appreciate his POV since it most closely mirrors mine.  His snippy comments make me go or but most often get a from me. 

Artful Dodger: When he's diplomatic, I respond in kind. And his Czuchisms are met with Usurperisms. It's all par for the course. I hope you are correct, that he cherishes truth. Fewer Czuchisms might be more convincing. Just as in debate with you, however, it sometimes gets heated. Yet fondness and mutual respect grows sometimes in spite of these things, or perhaps even because of them. It's our world. The challenge for all of us is to understand it and make it better. To some extent all these debates, from whichever side, are conducive to those ends & represent a real striving for something better.

The Usurper:
  You got me on that one! 

Artful Dodger: lol :o)

The Usurper:Now I gotta come up with some Dodgerisms. 

Artful Dodger: Your telling me that I get my 9/11 info from Rosie O'Donnell is a good start. lol

Artful Dodger: That's not what you've said in the past.

(V):Rubbish. You're making a false statement (as usual).  You quote me out of context (a typical ploy of the lying liberal left media). Here's what I did say:

Subject: But you DO use Fox News as a major source of information, correct?
Modified by Artful Dodger (6. March 2009, 21:53:28)
The Usurper:No I don't

and

"I don't get my news from Fox.  I get it from many sources...."

It's ONE source. I've said it's the best source for news but it's NOT my only source.  Don't try to put words into my mouth.  Would you like a list of the various sources? I really get tired of your constant manipulation of what people (particularly me) say on this board.  If you can't get your facts straight, then stay out of the conversation.

Artful Dodger: I think it was you said Fox was your most trusted source, either that or that Fox news is the most trusted or should be in America.

As usual I am making a false statement.. That's an opinion from a person on the other side of the political spectrum... I hope you don't mind that I don't pay any attention to such a comment.

(V): Why don't you just admit that you made a false statement and get it over with.  Saying Fox is the most trusted and that "I don't get my news from Fox" are two different things.  I've clarified this for you if you would care to read it and try to honestly understand it instead of trying to be clever (which you're not). 

And I couldn't care less if you don't pay attention to what I said about you making false statements.  It's a fact that you do this to me and it's also a fact that you do this with others. 

Artful Dodger: Chill dude, it ain't the end of the world.

"It's a fact that you do this to me and it's also a fact that you do this with others."

Blimey.. a fact? ... if you say so.

(V):Stay out of the conversations if you're going to be dishonest. 

Artful Dodger: It's an open board, I'll say my opinion if feel so. There is nothing illegal about that... I mean, if being opinionated was illegal.... How many politicians would still have a job.

(V): Yet!!

heavenlyemma: Nahhhh according to Jewish history, they've been saved from the Romans which was that bit in Rev's being fulfilled, and Ghenna is long since gone. But as Pardes rules go, it still gives a message of the end of evil and hope for those suffering through the awakening process.

(V): Didn't you know the aliens are coming from space to end it all as we can't look after the planet properly and they want to start over again.

heavenlyemma: Oh no they are not!! If they had wanted to do that they could have done it years ago.... But there again... some council could be looking at our case and whether they think we are sane enough to be part of the Galaxy.... as I guess as within a hundred years we might have developed the tech to start exploring.

(V): Yeah, yeah, yeah I had a dream they are not happy chappies lol

heavenlyemma: I don't blame them for not being happy with us. We (well our leaders) play to many silly games, that could well be considered very kiddish.

One message they could be trying to send by the more dramatic first encounters recently is... "you ain't that big and powerful"

(V): We are nothing to them they could wipe us out just like that if need be.

heavenlyemma: I remember in one of Heinlein's books "Stranger in a Strange Land"... The Martians being a far superior race destroyed a world in our system, as the race was to insane and violent to be allowed to exist... hence the asteroid belt.

.... Oh they thought about Earth as well, but thanks to a kid they saw we had potential to grow and change.

(V): I think I may lean a bit more towards Emma's interpretation here. lol :o)

The Usurper: Well if they have developed the tech for making anti-matter relatively cheaply... one bomb would do the job.

And when I say cheaply I say it because at our current level of tech it would bankrupt the USA to make one teaspoon full of the stuff.

(V): Maybe I didn't follow your conversation with Emma closely enough. I was assuming you were arguing the aliens would most likely be friendly types, and she was arguing the contrary. Did I miss the point? Up until the last few years, I believe I would have argued in favor of the aliens. Now I'm not so sure. lol

The Usurper: They have to be friendly, if they were not we'd be dead.

It speaks that a race in space has gotten over many of the infighting problems that young cultures such as us still experience.

(V): That's a good argument and may be correct, unless....they have other less-than-pleasant reasons NOT to make us dead.

Perhaps not likely, but a possibility. I suppose I am inclined to think, looking at the abduction phenomena, either a lot of people are hallucinating or it is really happening. And if the latter, the aliens don't seem too respectful of the rights of self-conscious beings, at least other than themselves.

Of course, if they aren't actually killing people they abduct, I guess that can be considered a plus. I sure hope you're right. lol

The Usurper: I guess, one would want to know about our make up, I guess the real shock is that there is aliens to those they abduct. Plus I imagine that in the past they were a little shaky on what to drug us with so we wouldn't remember. As you said, they ain't killing anyone.

Considering our early years in medicine, and how we use to treat those with mental health issues... and other problems or 'phobias' (to put it nicely)... and still do in some areas of the world... We can't really comment much. But yes we can... we kill, they don't.

Seemingly at the mo, it's more 1st encounters then anything else. I think they want us to lift the lid off all the secrecy, even though it might be quite a shock.

The Usurper: Explain to us ( the ignorant ones with our heads in the sand) how your theory about the government causing tragedies on purpose to gain control through fear and intimidation for some evil agenda against the good of the common people fits with the military targeting civilians for murder?

The Usurper: Are you kidding me??? Really??? You have movies made by liberals that garner awards from other liberals who also make movies, and even a Nobel peace award from more self serving liberals, all pushing for liberal agendas, gets to the point where every school kid in America was forced to watch, and then be crammed down their throats as truth....


You got no problems with any of that crap????

Czuch: "You got no problems with any of that crap????"

Either you're missing my point or I'm missing yours. I told you what I think of Al Gore. I told you what I think of all the corporate news media, both liberal and conservative. Why, if I reject all of it, would you then think I have no problem with any of it?