6/1/2012 11:32:49 AM

http://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/2012/06/19/talk-show-hosts-deemed-hypocritical-for-mocking-mitt-romneys-personal-wealth/

translation:

6/19/2012 1:55:38 PM

Well now to be honest, it is hypocritical to talk about his wealth from the perspective that they are poor, same with Hollywood A-listers saying the same thing. Yes Romney is extremely rich and doesn't know what its like to live paycheck to paycheck like a majority of Americans, but I would venture a guess that Obama is the same thing along with every single politician in Washington.

I honestly don't get why having money that was earned in the private sector not by being an actor or pro athlete is such a bad thing.

6/19/2012 2:02:04 PM

Quote :

"Well now to be honest, it is hypocritical to talk about his wealth from the perspective that they are poor"

when have any of them come from that perspective?

6/19/2012 2:25:31 PM

Quote :

"Yes Romney is extremely rich and doesn't know what its like to live paycheck to paycheck like a majority of Americans, but I would venture a guess that Obama is the same thing along with every single politician in Washington."

Not quite, Obama at least had a middle-class childhood. Not quite paycheck to paycheck, but not rich-as-shit old money like Romney.

6/19/2012 3:04:16 PM

Still people act like it is a crime to be born with money. You can't choose your parents.

6/19/2012 4:04:15 PM

being born to rich parents shouldn't entitle you to dick.


it does, though. but it shouldn't.

6/19/2012 4:08:11 PM

i wish i could remember the study and the exact amounts, but i remember reading an interesting piece that said this:

if you took all the worlds wealth and distributed it equally to everyone we would all end up with about $9000.

within 3 weeks(?) something like 80 percent(?) of the worlds wealth would be back in the same hands it is now.

6/19/2012 4:10:31 PM

Quote :

"being born to rich parents shouldn't entitle you to dick. it does, though. but it shouldn't."

lol, fucking pathetic.

6/19/2012 4:11:31 PM

^^^right, the government should take all of your money, property, and possessions when you die and tax family gifts at 100%!

[Edited on June 19, 2012 at 4:19 PM. Reason : .]

6/19/2012 4:12:05 PM

^did I say that?

6/19/2012 4:15:26 PM

Quote :

"shouldn't entitle you to dick"

were you referring to homosex?

[Edited on June 19, 2012 at 4:17 PM. Reason : s]

6/19/2012 4:16:59 PM

Quote :

"i wish i could remember the study and the exact amounts, but i remember reading an interesting piece that said this: if you took all the worlds wealth and distributed it equally to everyone we would all end up with about $9000. within 3 weeks(?) something like 80 percent(?) of the worlds wealth would be back in the same hands it is now."

You are stupid.

6/19/2012 8:21:46 PM

because obviously i performed this study-

maybe i was seeing if someone here could dig it up?

"youre stupid."

go back to 2nd grade and eat some paste.

6/19/2012 9:00:50 PM

Find it. I dare you. I double dog dare you.

6/19/2012 9:53:32 PM

A person who can simulate the cash flow of the entire world would be a trillionarie.

6/19/2012 10:06:52 PM

^^even without finding the study, which im looking for now, isnt it a pretty simple concept to understand?

you know, the rich knowing more about money management?

just a guess, maybe you never played monopoly?

[Edited on June 19, 2012 at 10:28 PM. Reason : -]

6/19/2012 10:27:53 PM

All I'm seeing is you failing to back up a stupid as fuck claim you made.

6/19/2012 10:34:26 PM

i just see someone with poor reading comprehension and a name that suggests its source.

[Edited on June 19, 2012 at 11:33 PM. Reason : -]

6/19/2012 11:31:31 PM

Your schtick is old.

6/20/2012 12:14:27 AM

Quote :

"Still people act like it is a crime to be born with money. You can't choose your parents."

Boo fucking hoo. Poor oppressed rich people.

Maybe if rich people actually did what "trickle down economics" fucking lying republicans said they do people wouldn't be so pissed that they were lucky enough to be born from a wealthy vagina.

But we can't have that, can we? They're not spreading the wealth at all and taking any of their hard-earned money and giving it to people who weren't quite as lucky is socialism or something.

6/20/2012 12:16:17 AM

6/20/2012 12:24:15 AM

6/27/2012 3:43:10 PM

^^^Don't you know they worked hard to be born from from that vagina?

Fetuses just have to pull themselves up by the bootstrapsumbilical cord

[Edited on June 27, 2012 at 8:19 PM. Reason : ]

6/27/2012 8:19:31 PM

6/28/2012 3:34:13 PM

7/23/2012 12:10:09 PM

USA 1776-2012

this is seriously their headline article right now:

http://www.foxnews.com/sports/2012/07/27/will-us-dip-american-flag-at-olympic-ceremony/

[Edited on July 27, 2012 at 4:21 PM. Reason : ]

7/27/2012 4:16:33 PM

Oh my god , that's like, a 400% increase!!!!

8/1/2012 6:58:02 PM

Fox "News"

8/1/2012 7:01:28 PM

[Graph not to scale]

8/1/2012 9:13:37 PM

youre right!

my god!

look at that scale! it doesnt start at 0! and it goes up by 2s!

TWOS I TELL YA.

8/1/2012 9:45:15 PM

It's the visual representation he's talking about. A 4.5% increase is visually represented as being nearly 4x bigger.

8/2/2012 12:15:39 AM

thats because it doesnt start at zero.

8/2/2012 12:32:34 AM

No shit Sherlock its just intellectually dishonest.

8/2/2012 12:41:30 AM

journalism in general doesnt exactly hold intellectual honesty in the highest esteem.

this thread is supposed to be about problems unique to foxnews.

i understand your beef with the graph, the problem is obvious, but its labeled far better than it had to be; this is far from egregious.

i assume youre upset because the average foxnews-watching troglodyte is only going to notice the pretty gold bars, fair enough.

youre right of course, but this graph doesnt affect that sort of person at all, and neither would the unbiased representation if they had actually started at zero.

the fanatic that doesnt notice the scale is only going to notice the increase, no matter how large or small.

8/2/2012 1:11:06 AM

That's a terribly misleading graph, specifically designed to to be terribly misleading. Doesn't matter if it was on Fox or MSNBC, it's terribly misleading and shouldn't be reported as factual "news".

8/2/2012 10:33:38 AM

I have a serious problem with this line:

Quote :

"journalism in general doesnt exactly hold intellectual honesty in the highest esteem."

8/2/2012 12:23:15 PM

gg Shepard Smith for calling yesterday the "National Day of Intolerance"

8/2/2012 4:57:42 PM

Quote :

"Ten Signs of Intellectual Honesty Posted on November 14, 2010 | 19 Comments I can never post this too much… When it comes to just about any topic, it seems as if the public discourse on the internet is dominated by rhetoric and propaganda. People are either selling products or ideology. In fact, just because someone may come across as calm and knowledgeable does not mean you should let your guard down and trust what they say. What you need to look for is a track record of intellectual honesty. Let me therefore propose 10 signs of intellectual honesty. 1. Do not overstate the power of your argument. One’s sense of conviction should be in proportion to the level of clear evidence assessable by most. If someone portrays their opponents as being either stupid or dishonest for disagreeing, intellectual dishonesty is probably in play. Intellectual honesty is most often associated with humility, not arrogance. 2. Show a willingness to publicly acknowledge that reasonable alternative viewpoints exist. The alternative views do not have to be treated as equally valid or powerful, but rarely is it the case that one and only one viewpoint has a complete monopoly on reason and evidence. 3. Be willing to publicly acknowledge and question one’s own assumptions and biases. All of us rely on assumptions when applying our world view to make sense of the data about the world. And all of us bring various biases to the table. 4. Be willing to publicly acknowledge where your argument is weak. Almost all arguments have weak spots, but those who are trying to sell an ideology will have great difficulty with this point and would rather obscure or downplay any weak points. 5. Be willing to publicly acknowledge when you are wrong. Those selling an ideology likewise have great difficulty admitting to being wrong, as this undercuts the rhetoric and image that is being sold. You get small points for admitting to being wrong on trivial matters and big points for admitting to being wrong on substantive points. You lose big points for failing to admit being wrong on something trivial. 6. Demonstrate consistency. A clear sign of intellectual dishonesty is when someone extensively relies on double standards. Typically, an excessively high standard is applied to the perceived opponent(s), while a very low standard is applied to the ideologues’ allies. 7. Address the argument instead of attacking the person making the argument. Ad hominem arguments are a clear sign of intellectual dishonesty. However, often times, the dishonesty is more subtle. For example, someone might make a token effort at debunking an argument and then turn significant attention to the person making the argument, relying on stereotypes, guilt-by-association, and innocent-sounding gotcha questions. 8. When addressing an argument, do not misrepresent it. A common tactic of the intellectually dishonest is to portray their opponent’s argument in straw man terms. In politics, this is called spin. Typically, such tactics eschew quoting the person in context, but instead rely heavily on out-of-context quotes, paraphrasing and impression. When addressing an argument, one should shows signs of having made a serious effort to first understand the argument and then accurately represent it in its strongest form. 9. Show a commitment to critical thinking. ‘Nuff said. 10. Be willing to publicly acknowledge when a point or criticism is good. If someone is unable or unwilling to admit when their opponent raises a good point or makes a good criticism, it demonstrates an unwillingness to participate in the give-and-take that characterizes an honest exchange. While no one is perfect, and even those who strive for intellectual honesty can have a bad day, simply be on the look out for how many and how often these criteria apply to someone. In the arena of public discourse, it is not intelligence or knowledge that matters most – it is whether you can trust the intelligence or knowledge of another. After all, intelligence and knowledge can sometimes be the best tools of an intellectually dishonest approach. -Mike Gene"

http://designmatrix.wordpress.com/2010/11/14/ten-signs-of-intellectual-honesty-2/

I don't think your average cable news station really demonstrates any of these qualities.

[Edited on August 3, 2012 at 8:57 AM. Reason : -]

8/3/2012 8:57:29 AM

http://youtu.be/85w6362CrG0

Team USA not patriotic enough for Fox News

8/6/2012 2:00:35 PM

^ that is pathetic even for Faux Noise...To attack our Olympic Athletes behind their backs in their proudest
moment of their entire lives is despicable and disgusting...

8/6/2012 6:07:08 PM

What's even sillier is that they equate patriotism with obnoxiousness.

8/7/2012 3:04:55 PM

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/08/07/taxpayer-backed-free-lunch-program-feeds-controversy-in-california/

fuck feeding the children, amirite?

8/7/2012 4:20:14 PM

^^^^

Ok that's ridiculous. I saw that right after reading a couple articles about how inappropriate it was for Shep Smith to interject his personal opinion during the hard news hours before 5pm by way of a one sentence jab. Here's a 5 minute segment during the same hard news hours lamenting that we no longer "drape ourselves in the flag" (in the words of the commentator) at the Olympics. So much wrong with that its almost hilarious

1) Draping/wrapping oneself in the flag is an idiom meaning to pretend to be doing something for patriotic reasons or out of loyalty when one's real motives are selfish. And here we have a commentator saying how its a shame we don't do that at the olympics anymore?

2) Suggesting that at some point wearing a big enough flag becomes a meaningful expression of patriotism while failing to realize that representing your nation through years of training and dedication to excellence at an international competition is the expression of patriotism that matters and is at the heart of olympic competition.

3) Failing to realize the prominant "stars and stripes" patterned olympic uniforms were pretty much just 1988 (just 1988 and not so much before or afer with very few examples) for the general uniforms and only a few specific years for the gymnastics leotards (such as 1996.)

4) Speaking nostalgically for the days when America and Americans excuded "jingoism." That's saying they miss "extreme chauvinism or nationalism marked especially by a belligerent foreign policy." Perhaps they would have liked to say pride and confidence but accidentally substituted those words with what they were really mean by that.

So that commentator thinks patriotism is something you use to conceal selfish motives, measured by the size of the flag on your shirt, and the expression of belligerence. The commentator might not have been describing all Fox news personality's view of patriotism, but he certainly seemed to be describing his own. He really did a great job of wrapping himself in the flag there. I'm sure he rides he thinks the Compensator SL he drives actually does something for his length and girth too.

[Edited on August 7, 2012 at 4:21 PM. Reason : a]

8/7/2012 4:21:17 PM

^^ hmm, I didn't get that vibe at all

Quote :

"Taxpayer watchdog groups say most Americans are fine helping children truly in need. But Jon Coupal, with the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, asks, "if someone is coming from a family that makes a quarter of a million dollars a year, and they're not checking eligibility when they're coming in the door, I think most people would wonder, 'Am I paying for this?'""

Quote :

"Organizers contend after a summer of nourishing meals, these kids will do better when school resumes in the fall. Monitors are on hand to make sure the lunch is eaten on site, and that the adults don't mooch off the kids. But those rules don't go far enough for critics who wonder if the "come one, come all" invitation won't have taxpayers feeding every child, whether they're needy or not."

8/7/2012 5:02:57 PM

8/17/2012 3:48:37 PM

I always find it funny when racially charged articles on the absurd FoxNation site turn off the ability to comment. I wonder why they do that?

case in point:

http://nation.foxnews.com/barack-obama/2012/08/16/conservative-steps-pay-hospital-bill-obamas-sick-brother

8/21/2012 2:42:25 PM

Bazinga

8/24/2012 11:46:19 AM

8/24/2012 1:19:09 PM

"OH HE MAD!"

and lol @ "...failed baseball player Michael Jordan..."

8/24/2012 7:43:51 PM