As the price of gas continues it inexorable climb to $5 and up, I wonder how high it will have to rise before we start to tap natural resources protected by well-intentioned environmentalists. With China and Cuba drilling for oil a mere 50 miles from the Florida Keys, it makes a lot of Americans wonder why we aren't doing the same thing.
You'll recall the hubbub that arose when the Alaskan Pipeline was first proposed, and the subsequent years have shown that the ecological predictions of catastrophe were unfounded. I guess I work from the perspective that oil companies have as much interest in not having accidents as the environmentalists, but for financial as well as ecological reasons. There is always risk involved when there is much to be gained.
Opening up ANWAR and drilling offshore are only stop-gap measures to be sure, but would an announcement that we intend to begin exploration not have an effect on the current speculation that is driving the cost of a barrel of oil through the roof? Hopefully that would help get the price headed in the other direction.
There are legislators on both sides who realize that nuclear power must also be a part of the solution, and my hope is that after November we can put the politics aside for a while and concentrate on energy independence. Expanding nuclear power, solar power, extended battery life, wind power (lots of windmills here in Lewis County), and opening new refineries are pieces of the puzzle that should not be overlooked.
It's hard not to take it out on big oil when they show record profits - even a confirmed capitalist such as myself would like an explanation as to who or what is driving this upward spiral. We have to keep in mind that millions of other Americans have their pensions and savings tied up in that industry, so I would hope that any action taken by Congress would be measured and prudent. Tax breaks for someone making record profits doesn't make sense, unless you're going to put that money into exploration and research & development. Tax breaks for any industry are always a point of contention, and I'd be in favor of doing away with all industry tax breaks, but then the issue becomes parochial and the politicians suddenly care more about being reelected and protecting their own constituency.
Whoever becomes our next President will be faced with some very difficult decisions as regards our environment, our economy, and our continued reliance upon oil. Short term actions such as opening up areas for exploration are really long term due to the nature of the business, but could have an immediate impact on oil prices. Research and development of new technologies is the key to our success as far as I can see. Setting up a new government bureaucracy to trade in carbon credits would not only be counterproductive because of new bureaucrats, but it would also do more harm to our economy. All the increases in the cost of doing business will be passed onto us, and our climate won't change one bit without China and India buying in.
What do you think? If you don't think tapping our own resources will help, what will? Should our economy falter because the government wants to get into the carbon credit business? Let's even assume that everything ever written about global warming is true - do you think placing the burden on the American taxpayer is going to solve anything? How is it that we get China and India to tell their millions of inhabitants that a better life is not possible?
Interesting questions that have a pat conservative or liberal answer, but isn't it time we scrapped all the usual party line talking points and developed a unified approach to the problem?
Even those of us who question global warming are aware that any contribution we can make towards eliminating pollution should be pursued, and we certainly feel that our dependence on foreign oil leaves us in a precarious position. It seems to me that neither side can have it totally their way, so nothing will be done until after November. John McCain has shown that he's willing to compromise (congrats to Sen. Kennedy for the successful surgery - he may not represent a lot of my views, but we Irish Catholics still pray for one another) and try to get the ball rolling.
That's why he'll get my vote in November.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
41 comments:
On December 7, 1941 the United States military was ranked 17th in the world. When the surrender of Japan was signed in Tokyo Bay in September of 1945, the United States was far and away the strongest military power in the world. That was accomplished in only 46 months! Granted we had a head start thanks to FDR's 50,000 aircraft a year dictum in 1940 and the Vinson-Trammell Act of 1934, but the ability of the United States to react to a national emergency was nothing short of miraculous.
In 1959 NASA couldn't get a rocket off the pad. In 1969 we walked on the moon. Need I say more?
Throughout our history there have been rogues, mountebanks, greedy war profiteers, crooks, dirty politicians, traitors, 5th columnists, fanatics of all stripes and Luddites (now environmental Luddites). In spite of everything that tried to hold this country back, we have always risen to the challenges facing us and overcome them. I have no doubt it will be ever thus.
There is no reason why, with all the alternatives available to us and with the depth of scientific and entrepreneurial knowledge and skill we possess, this country can't overcome our dependency on foreign oil and overcome it quickly. There will be Liberal eggs broken and Conservative eggs broken, but I firmly believe it can and will be done. There is simply no other acceptable choice.
You mean scientific knowledge that conservatives love to suppress when it doesn't comport with conservative views? Or scientific knowledge from the US that is being shipped to India and China because scientists in the USA cannot get funding? Been in a research institute lately? Compare the numbers of post-doctoral scientists that hold US citizenship with the number that hold Chinese or Indian citizenship. It's not economically or politically worthwhile for a US citizen to get an advanced research degree these days.
Oh, I'd put a name down but it seems Watson's blog doesn't allow it when you click the "name" button.
Take a deep breath, go to choose an identity in orange letters, click on the little circle next to Name/URL. A dot will appear in the little circle and it will open a "name" line and a 'URL" line. Type whatever name you want in the name line and ignore the URL line. When you post your message, magically the name you have typed in will be there above the post.
I'd do that if the name line would appear.
Hummmmmm! Must have one of those computers with the secret neo-con chip embedded in it. Watch out for the black helicopters.
You seem to be whistling past the graveyard,Watson.
Doesn't this drill in the arctic argument sound vaguely familiar?
The stupid environmentalists warned about the Cod being depleated, the forests of the NW being logged out, the Salmon fisheries dying, the Oceans becoming polluted,,,,,,
but, big business has always found a way to squeeze our natural resources until the damange is irreversible.
Why do Conservatives talke about American "Business" as though they are your next door neighbors. They are soul-less corporate spoilers that don't give a damn about what they do to the enmvironment, their employees, public safety, or how the exhaust natural resources.
NATIONALIZE BIG OIL - NOW.
anon,
or, register with Google, start a blog, then you can sign in with your blog and harrass Watson with style.
Good solution for our energy problems. Unfortunately it's the same solution that's been proposed for the last 50 years - drill for more oil.
I agree, we can put a man on the Moon and build a space station, but somehow we can't become energy independent? There must be some reason behind that. Say, wasn't the effort to put a man on the Moon a government effort (along with the help of a few Nazi scientists)? Maybe there is actually a role for government in solving our energy problems. Yes it can be done, but it will not be done until the right people are in power. People that are not beholden to one industry or another. Energy independence will truly make the USA the most powerful nation on earth and getting there will result in an economic and technological boom not seen since the space race.
Let's start by giving college educations to every veteran that wants one. Sort of like we did after WWII.
PCS, I agree with you. Unfortunately neither of the presidential candidates has anything like a comprehensive energy policy for the future. The Republican Congress didn't and the Democratic Congress doesn't. The best they can do is rearrange the Titan tic’s deck chairs. Maybe we should take the Truman approach and threaten to nationalize all the US energy firms and draft all the executives in to the Armed Forces.
Unlike some others I believe we have all the elements necessary for an energy independence initiative. We also have the necessary infrastructure which no other country has.
Personally I'm gonna vote for McCain too. Surely the last 7 years or so have shown what conservatives can do for our country, especially when it comes to war, the economy and fuel prices. McCain's energy policy is drill for more oil.
Sir Charles, let's both pretend you didn't say the "n" (nationalize) word. That is not a good word for a conservative to utter.
How about this? I'll agree to drilling for oil offshore and in the arctic, using very conservative environmental engineering and you agree that for every dollar spent on oil we spend a dollar developing alternative energy.
As for nuclear power, I'm not opposed to it. I actually like pebble bed reactors. We need small, cheap, standardized nuclear reactors though. But you tell me how we are going to store the waste safely, not only for us but for our children, grandchildren and great grandchildren.
"Threaten", however, is definately in the Conservative lexicon. As to the waste, I'm sure we can work something out with North Korea.
Let's not count the 11 million gallons of spilled oil. But that wasn't the fault of the oil pipeline. But why was that tanker there to begin with?
You know, NSI Anon. some years back I read an excellent book written by William Manchester. The title is "A World Lit Only By Fire". Look it up, I think you'd enjoy it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_World_Lit_Only_by_Fire
You trying to get me to understand your medieval mind?
Good man!!!! you looked it up! A story about people freezing to death in the dark. Your kind of folks.
How is all that Chinese drilling for oil a mere 50 miles from Florida coming Watson? Please cite where you got that information - FOX News, Lenny Gropper or Dick Cheney? Turns out it just isn't true. Ask Republican Senator Mel Martinez (who opposes drilling for oil off the coast of Florida but, ironically enough, not in ANWR, it's not true
Personally, I want to ferment my own CO2-consuming octane-producing bacteria in my backyard. To hell with big oil.
From the review I read it seemed the book was more about the ignorance of the medieval mind and how the church wanted to keep it that way. Sort of the way conservatives are when it comes to science.
Actually the book was well written, just inaccurate and poorly informed.
I simply googled "China and Cuba drill for oil" - I can't remember where I initially heard about it. They haven't pumped any oil yet, but that really makes no difference to us, unless those greedy communists have an accident and it hits our shores right? Try googling "leased oil rigs" and see what country it is that currently has the majority of them tied up.
I don't believe I said that drilling for oil was the only alternative, only a part of the overall solution that gets us through until we find that new energy source. If it's there, we're foolish not to go after it. I believe I indicated that research and development are the key to our success.
As regards people not going into the sciences because there's no money in it - I think the point has some validity. It would be interesting to do historical calculations and see just how many of our great scientists were actually born in the US. When we glamorize actors and athletes and the pursuit of the almighty dollar, why are we surprised when so few of our kids have an interest in science? That may sound strange coming from you know who, but I think you'll find that there are a lot of us that just don't give a damn about accumulating vast sums of money. Living paycheck to paycheck is not unknown in conservative households.
I don't know why some people automatically assume that conservatives don't believe in science, or we chose only to believe what supports our position. We are all predisposed to do so, and if it were not for the "scientific method", and scientists dedicated to unbiased research, we'd be forced to learn a lot of things the hard way.
Of course, none of these dedicated scientists, engineers, technicians, etc. work for those greedy oil companies and other corporate meanies. The people in the offices, from mail clerks to the top of the ladder, they're nothing like you and I - they're all bad, they're different.
I'm sorry - what kind of racism is that?
I know you're not a racist; I was merely making a point. When we dehumanize any group of people, isn't that racist? Wasn't that what prompted FDR to put American citizens in camps - because of their ethnicity? How uncomfortable are American citizens of Middle Eastern origin in the US now? We'd all like to be sure that we look at every stranger as a fellow child of God, but when time and circumstance focus fear on any distinguishable "group of beings", it's not always easy to do.
We all want as pristine an environment as possible, but not at the expense of the people's need to provide for themselves and their families. We should utilize, or at least reconsider, every option at our disposal.
But why did you google China and Cuba drill for oil? You must of heard it somewhere. I googled it too and mainly found the "fact" that China was drilling for oil off Florida on conservative websites. I had to look around a bit to find the truth. Three of the first four google entries for "China and Cuba drill for oil" are americafreepress, FoxNews and heartland.org - not places I'm generally comfortable getting information.
Sorry about conservatives generally being believed to be people who don't believe in science. But there are big issues that put you there: evolution, climate change, young earth just to name a few. Sure liberals have their science denying wingnuts too. The crystal using, magnetizing homeopaths and naturopaths for instance. But they make no bones about being mystical types and are easy to dismiss.
As for dehumanizing people, I sure do agree that people are dehumanized when we fear them, sort of like we did the Japanese when we nuked them.
As for the no money in science statement....scientists generally don't care about making large salaries. What they care about is getting grant funds to do their research. That is where the lack of money is.
It's nice that you are concerned about people providing for themselves. I am too. But I am also concerned about the kind of world we are going to leave our children and our grandchildren.
PCS, two of the first five google entries were the St. Petersburg Times and CNN.com, not your Mother's conservative rags. I don't think anyone other than Cheney is saying they're doing it now, but they do have an "arrangement" with Cuba and very well could in the near future.
I'm sorry that you feel that all conservatives are the Pat Roberts, Russ Limppaw, Sean Hannity nut jobs. That's no more true than saying that all Liberals are of the Nancy Pilosi, Jane Fonda, Rosie O'Donnell whackjob ilk. It's that kind of thinking that makes any intelligent political discourse impossible in this day and age.
In WWII we didn't fear the native Japanese, we hated their military and wrongly, we didn't trust our citizens of Japanese ancestry. Our hatred of the Japanese military was well founded. Read "Flyboys" by James Bradley if you want a taste of what Bushido and the Spirit Warriors were up to in WWII. Unfortunately they hid behind their populace.
As to scientists not caring about money, that statement is just plain silly. Take a look at the salaries paid to scientists in Universities across the country, scientists in private industry and even scientists working for the government and compare their salaries with yours. Scientists in the US are the best paid in the world.
If we don't do something about an energy policy that includes the short run as well as 100 years from now our children (my great grandchildren) will be freezing to death in the dark in a world lit only by fire.
Ok, maybe I'm using a liberal computer and you are using a conservative computer. Google "China and Cuba drill for oil" and you will find the entries just as I stated them. I try not to lie.
Tell me, just how much do you think scientists in academia, government are paid? Since I happen to be a scientist I'd be really interested in what you think. Maybe we differ on what we think "a lot" of money is. Basic research scientists do not make near what engineers, medical doctors, lawyers or plumbers make. And I stand by my statement that most basic research scientist care much more about their work and getting funding to obtain it than they do about their salary. As for silly statements, scientists are the best paid in the world? Since almost every American is the best paid in the world that would follow wouldn't it?
I fully agree that political discourse between us may not be possible, especially when you group Nancy Pelosi with "people" like Rush Limbaugh and Pat Roberts. Maybe you could reconsider your comparisons. I have lots of conservative friends but even they agree that Rush Limbaugh and Bill O'Reilly are scumbags whose only job is to make Americans fear something.
Thanks for recommending books for me to read but I have my own reading interests and WWII really more towards the bottom of the list. Conservatives sure love that war, too bad they couldn't learn something about war from all that reading. The Japs were bad, torture is wrong...oh well I mean you know torture is....well it's ok if we do it. But trying to invade someone elses country is bad and....oh wait.
Do something about energy in the short term? Yeah Democrats are as guilty as Republicans but what party has been leading this country for the last 25 yrs?
I'm sure you also believe that the pied piper was a pederast, that St. Agustine was opposed to sex, that Robin Hood was a real person and that medieval people had no concept of time (what with them planting crops in the winter and all). I guess we just obtain very different information from what we read. I'll send you some candles.
Regardless of where you get your news, it is a FACT that China and Cuba have agreed to drill for oil in the Florida Straits. China has leases on the vast majority of the oil rigs in the world - that is a FACT. Sorry if your internal computer is unable to verify.
Bill O'Reilly and Rush Limbaugh have the most watched and the most listened to shows in America, and that's what bothers you more than anything else. How can so many people be so stupid that they listen to and believe these two? That's what makes you feel so superior and allows you to condescend, call them scumbags, and disregard anything they have to say. How much time have you ever spent watching or listening? Damn little would be my guess. If your cohorts at Air America really represented the majority of the American body politic, would they be such a miserable failure?
We are all capable of having good ideas, creative solutions, and ludicrous flights of fancy - regardless of ideology.
Your attempt to link and equate waterboarding (or whatever it is you think we're doing) to the horrendous treatment of our prisoners by the Japanese is not only insulting, but evidences the depth of your knowledge. The Bataan Death March, Cabanatuan, prisoners stuffed in the holds of cargo ships, beheadings (who is it that does that now?), no food, no medicine - Guantanamo is a freakin' four star hotel compared to what our POW's suffered.
For the record, it's not "war" that some of us are attracted to - it's history. How people interacted, cause and effect, great plans and miserable failures, and especially the nature of man at war, the bonds that are formed, the incredible acts of bravery and cowardice - everything that humans are capable of in extreme situations.
As far as who's been leading the country for the past 25 years, when it comes to an energy policy, I'd have to say no one has been leading. Procrastination appears to be one of the primary tools in the congressional tool box.
Political discourse is always possible PCS, it's just better over a beer and pizza, face to face.
Oh, and I do agree that most scientists are drawn to the work because of their love of the subject matter. There are millions of people in jobs that they perform because they enjoy their work, not because they're concerned about making a fortune. Kind of reminds me of musicians such as myself who continue to perform because we love doing it - it sure ain't for the money.
Here's a verse from a song I wrote called "I Won't Live For The Money":
If you've worked hard and you've made it
Or if luck has come your way
Try to think about your brother
You were like him yesterday
For those of you still struggling
Try and face life with a smile
You don't need a lot of money to live life with a lot of style
I wrote that 20 some years ago, and I've not experienced anything during that time that would cause me to change that sentiment.
You make this statement; "I fully agree that political discourse between us may not be possible" and then you hasten to prove it.
I didn't group Nancy Pelosi with Limbaugh and Roberts; I grouped her with Fonda and O'Donnell. This kind of subtle shift seems to be the left's lingua franca.
The book to which I referred you documents Japanese cannibalism as the senior officers on Chichi Jima stir fried and ate the livers of executed American flyers who were shot down over the Island. Cannibalism was a widespread practice among the senior officers in the Japanese army. I haven't read about any Al Qaeda shish kabob being served in the Guantanamo mess.
I have no doubt that history is at the bottom of the list. But just for kicks, Google "unit 731" and spend 15 seconds scanning it. You'll find some really well financed science there.
At least we agree that American scientists along with other American workers are the best paid in the world. Now, as to worker productivity...not so much. Therein may lay the problem.
Bill O’Reily appeals to people who win arguments by shouting louder than their opponent. Persuasion by intimidation.
Limbough and his imitators appeal to people too lazy or too stupid to read or do research. Limbough has been proven a liar over and over, but it’s easier to believe him than it is to THINK.
They have a corner on the AM radio market because Rupert Murdock’s Clear Channel say’s that’s how it will be.
Bill has been looking over his shoulder at Keith closing in on him. Soon he’ll be in the dust.
"Countdown" Beats "O'Reilly Factor" In Ratings Demo For First Time Ever
"With China and Cuba drilling for oil a mere 50 miles from the Florida Keys, it makes a lot of Americans wonder why we aren't doing the same thing."
That's what you wrote Watson. You didn't write that Cuba and China have agreements to drill for oil in the Gulf. You do what Limbaugh and Hannity do and then act like you never said it. We were not talking ab out agreements, we were talking about actual drilling, but in your mind there is no difference.
So what if the Chinese are going to drill for oil for the Cubans? I wish we had an agreement with them to ship the oil to Louisiana for refinement rather than to Venezuela. But we can't have that because those two countries are COMMUNIST!
And, I realize you mentioned research into alternative energy. I think we have a biotechnological revolution on the horizon in terms of producing fuel from cellulose and CO2. But drilling for more oil is not the answer even in the short term. First of all, increasing fuel efficiency of vehicles would go farther and faster towards decreasing our dependence on Middle East oil than drilling for more oil. Any new oil in the Artic will take 7 years to reach market...we can do better than that with sufficient funding. Also, new alternative energy practices will result in many new jobs.
What bother me the most about so many people listening to Limbaugh and watching O'Reilly, is the amount of misinformation they get. I believe many studies have already shown that people that watch FOX are less informed than people who d o not watch FOX. I get most of my news from the internet - much of it from foreign newspapers and listening to the Daily show and Colbert Report. But no matter what I read, I check to see how accurate it is. Like China drilling for oil in sight of the Florida keys. I actually feel sorry for people who listen to Limbaugh.
I also think it's sad that you believe that it's ok for the good guys (that's supposed to be us)to torture people because that's what the Japanese did to us. But what bother me even more, is that phrase "whatever you think they're doing" regarding torture. I don't know what they are doing - this great free country that we live in has not really allowed detailed investigations into what our government is doing in our name. I'm pretty sure that whatever it is, you agree that it only amounts to "Frat party hazing". You are a real Christian Watson.
Any time you want to compare Congress people I'm at your service. I'll take Nancy Pelosi over Tom Delay anytime. Rosie O'Donnell never had a "wide stance" problem. And, although recently Democratic policians have had their sex scandals, at least those people have had the courtesy to resign (and not get standing ovations from their fellows).
As you know, I am willing to go tit-for-tat for as long as it takes. How about this though....you list 5 things you thing need to be done to improve our country, how they should be done and how Republicans are going to get them done. Then we can start having a political discourse.
"I believe many studies have already shown that people that watch FOX are less informed than people who d o not watch FOX."
You believe? Many studies? From God's lips to your ears? Come on pcs, your better than that. Most of what you write is congent and reasoned even if I don't agree. You make yourself look silly with comments like that. Its 4th grade playground name calling.
Should have read "cogent".
What did I say wrong?
The Program on International Policy Attitudes at the University of Maryland conducted a thorough study of public knowledge and attitudes about current events and the war on terrorism. Researchers found that the public’s mistaken impressions of three facets of U.S. foreign policy — discovery of alleged WMD in Iraq, alleged Iraqi involvement in 9/11, and international support for a U.S. invasion of Iraq — helped fuel support for the war.
Almost shocking was the extent to which Fox News viewers were mistaken. Those who relied on the conservative network for news, PIPA reported, were “three times more likely than the next nearest network to hold all three misperceptions.
Nielsen Media Research statistics show that when directly compared with O'Reilly Factor viewers, "Stewart's viewers are not only smart, but more educated than O'Reilly's.
A Pew Research Study has shown that viewers of the Daily show and the Colbert Report have the highest knowledge of national and international affairs, while Fox News viewers rank nearly dead last.
I guess I could spend more time looking for additional evidence but I don't want to. I still don't understand what I said that was so silly.
Maybe those studies and statistics haven't actually been done, but are only being thought about being done. Sort of like China drilling of the Fl Keys
I happen to agree with John McCain on the subject of torture - it's something we should not participate in. Regardless of how our prisoners are treated, we should always abide by international conventions. In most cases, we far surpass those standards.
Interesting you should list The Daily Show and The Colbert Report as news sources, even if you were being facetious. At least they're on Comedy Central, so there's some truth in advertising.
As far as Keith Olbermann goes, he was a good sportscaster, and he makes an excellent news reporter if you prefer a liberal perspective with venom. He wouldn't know fair and balanced if it hit him in the head.
We dance around, trade barbs, and accomplish nothing - which means we should be politicians I guess.
Watson,
You are the one dancing around.
You used numbers of viewers and listeners to attribute credibility to O'Reily and Limbough.
You said, "Bill O'Reilly and Rush Limbaugh have the most watched and the most listened to shows in America,"
I said Oberman is passing up O'Reily. (a fact)
You attack Oberman's style.
Not pertinent to the conversation.
The point is, Oberman is getting more viewers than O'Reily.
Quit dancing around when you are wrong. Wrong is wrong. Dancing won't change that.
By the way, NPR is probably the most listened to radio programs. I'll bet "Car Talk" has more listeners than Limpbough. They certainly have more credibility.
Neh, neh, nehnehnehyah. That is the best approximation I can give of this snappy repertoire. Anyhow, PCS, before you and Watson had your latest kiss up I was going to say that I congratulate you for coming back with some sources to back up "what you heard" about Fox. That's all I was looking for. I looked at both the "Misperceptions, the Media and the Iraq War" study that, while you didn't specifically name, I assume you were referring to as well as the Pew study to which you referred. They both backed up your contention...as far as they went. Now the fact that both studies are 5 years old...well, so what as long as they agree with your feelings.
Am I surprised that these studies found that FNC viewers were dumber than NPR listeners, or CNN viewers or MSNBC viewers? No. However, thanks to that glitch in our traditions, the dumb guys have the same vote as the smart guys.
Now I personally think Bret Hume is the best news anchor on TV, but that's just a personal opinion. I'm sure that I'm not as erudite as you and the various Anonomi, but I pretty much watch all the cable networks indiscriminately. I've never heard Limbaugh. I think Hannity is an asshole. In fact most of the wild ass Conservative crowd are, especially Laura and Ann. However, I've never been able to understand the hysterical liberal animus about O'Reilley. Sure he's a pompous bully, but he is actually very fair and balanced for the most part. Oh, he gets a hair up his bum occasionally, but who doesn't.
Now Obelmann (I guess that's his name), if he is soon to beat O'Reilley in the rating, good. Because he seems to have his shorts in an absolute twist about O'Reilley all the time. Whatever. Its not really news, its entertainment.
Goddamned shame about Russert, though. He truly was fair and balanced and quite possibly the best since Morrow.
Damn you two are really something. You make claims that turn out to be wrong or misinformed, you are provided with citations to sure where you were misinformed and then you act like as if you never wrote what you wrote. Or, at best you change the subject. It's really unbelievable.
We actually agree on quite alot, especially concerning Hannity, Laura and Ann. I don't listen to Olbermann but I think he gives O'Reilly his comeupence. O'Reilly is a bully and a pervert. Although, I will say that some of O'Reilly's written news columns are right occasionally.
Uh oh, what claim did I make that was untrue? I'm pretty old and my memory's not what it used to be, but I don't think I made any unsupported claims in this thread.
I guess it's not really a claim..."You believe? Many studies? From God's lips to your ears? Come on pcs, your better than that."
I guess I took that statement to mean I was making up the fact that studies were done about Fox News listeners. Turns out I was right and it wasn't just a belief. Your rejoinder... but those studies are 5 years old. And as long as they agree with my feelings? Damn man, they don't agree with my feelings...they are studies and statistics....you know evidence. Talk about Neh, neh, nehnehnehyah.
On top of that you then act like you knew Fox News listeners were dumb and are almost proud of that.
Why couldn't you have just asked me for proof about such studies to begin with? It sure would have saved a lot of time.
Okay, this is last tag on this one. Yes, I was poking fun at you for making a comment that started out stating that you "believe" and "many studies". These are non-specific terms. You then followed up with corroboration. When I checked the corroboration I found it to be at least 5 years old. A lot changes in 5 years. I believe (although I have no corroboration) that FNC viewers may be more intelligent today than five years ago. I base this solely on the fact that I didn't watch it 5 years ago and today I do. So I have only my opinion to base my contention on so it is pure
a priori reasoning on my part.
My comment about dumb FNC watchers was (I thought) an obvious attempt at sarcasm. If we just ask straight questions and give straight answers what fun would this forum be?
I think we have now beaten this thread to death. Hopefully Watson will shortly post another of his flamers and we can start out fresh.
One last word...Big Gay Al...Where are you? We miss you!
I agree sir charles, time to move forward. However, let's be a little more specific about "the fact is Olbermann is getting more viewers..."
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/06/10/countdown-beats-oreilly-f_n_106298.html
That's the link to Huffington's blog - Olbermann beat O'Reilly for the first time in the adults 25-54 demographic - that's all. O'Reilly still clobbered him overall with over 2 million viewers every night. Talk about only citing part of the truth to support your beliefs.
I assign no credibility based upon number of viewers - you can make of it what you wish.
Fox News viewers were mistaken. Those who relied on the conservative network for news, PIPA reported, were “three times more likely than the next nearest network to hold all three misperceptions.
The knot head who posted the above and then alludes to the fact that fox viewers are dumb needs to reread the study. it says 3X's more likely to hold ...3 misperceptions.
Rupert Murdoch controls AM ...what happened to AIR AMERICA?? It collapsed because noone listened to it, doughhead!! I personally think limbaugh is a windbag. And I challenge anyone to watch O'reilly for one week and then tell me how conservative he is. He doesn't even believe in the death penalty (not that there's anything wrong with that.) He's somewhat morally conservative and nearing a social libertarian.
WISE UP,PINHEAD.
Just sign me Pop'n'j
Oh and back to the line of thought.
If Clinton had allowed drilling in ANWAR in 1995 we would be refining the oil right now. The high and mighty tree huggers think it is fine to spoil others natural resources. NIMBYS all. NO nukes, no drilling, no windmills, no refineries no nothing. What a bunch of BANANA'a "Build Absolutely Nothing Anywhere Near Anybody"
PHOOEY
DRILL HERE, DRILL NOW, DRILL OFTEN.
POP'n'J
(oh no i cant add my name, woe is me, I'm too simple to think about putting it at the end of my post)\
what a maroon
Post a Comment