That's already happened I'm afraid.

I'm not saying you can't ever believe them, just that you need to be aware of what drives them in order to accurately interpret what they put out.

I don't trust for one second that the information I get is accurate. Even if it is based on facts too often commentary is weaved into the narrative . Unfortunately that is the reality .The only cure is to assume that reporting does not tell the whole story ;and to have sufficient freedom of speech and options for consumer to filter the news themselves. If not ;then you are consigned to accept the forgeries that Dan Rather presented as authentic proof.

The remote is the best invention to man since the wheel. Don't have to move to put on cartoon network. Did you know the Mickey Mouse club has a new song?

Everybody is a shock jock, and its about ratings. This is America and our dreams are built on money, and its no different if your conservetive, liberal, or radical. What do you think would happen if all the talking heads would have to get real jobs? Or worse yet, real opinions, who would pay for that?

My grand daughter and me, learn more from Dora the Explorer, than Rush Limbaugh, Hannity, or Lou "boohoo" Dobbs.

NK, if the message is true what difference does it make who the messenger is? Goggle "restore the fairness doctrine" and tell us what you find. Liberal congressman have made it no secret they want to restore the fairness doctrine which is anything but fair and has no place in a free nation.

Hurray for you Steve. Fairness in reporting is important - especially now. Of course it's been pretty one-sided for many years already and will continue if no one cares.

Exactly!

1. There are some crimes so brutal and senseless that capital punishment is the only appropriate punishment. A needle is far kinder than being slashed to death, for example.

2. Why are libs afraid of honest people having guns? In Texas we have a right to carry law, and the crime rate has not gone up. If some sociopath comes into a restaurant where I am dining and starts shooting, I really hope there are at least a dozen armed citizens there.

3. I don't object to homosexuals having rights. I object to them calling what they have "marriage".

Don't you think that those who disagree with you just might be reasonably intelligent?

Duh, You missed the point, Galveston, the main stream media *DOES NOT SUPPORT* these issues.

The media is either right wing or Moderate, NOT LIBERAL, angry white guy who can't control himself.

****Quit lying**** in order to support your fantasies.

[QUOTE=magprob]I shot my TV months ago. My wife was quite upset because I didn't take it outside first. Now, I just read Mein Kampf by Adolf Hitler. They say history repeats itself and I am finding that to be true. At least I now know what to expect.[QUOTE]


"[T]he people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders.. . All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger." - Hermann Goring; April 10, 1946

Oliver Wendell Holmes said "the best test of truth is the power of the thought to get itself accepted in the competition of the market"

I think it was with the advent of the television broadcast when those good ole days began. Before that the press was more like the founders envisioned as advocacy and not simply the dry reporting of news. Check out how the press was in their times. I have described the press of the 18th and 19th century as the bloggers of their day.

The problem with those good ole days when the 3 networks and the NY Slimes were the news of record was that there was no competition in the marketplace. It was the accepted truth because they told you it was .Not much different than the old Soviet Pravda if you ask me. When Walter Cronkite told us the war in Vietnam was lost (it was not ) we believed him and the anti-war movement went mainstream from that point on.

I think the news dissemination if not the presentation is much better now than then . The dinosaurs have proven themselves untrustworthy. Dan Rather manipulated and fabricated stories and presented them on prime time telecasts . It took the internet (those pesky people in the pajama media) to out his distortions. The NY Slimes has had a reporter(Jayson Blair) who faked stories .

The system is much better now because it is free and accountable to the market place. That is why the people in power are so hungry to slap controls on it. In 1985 The FCC ruled that the Fairness Doctrine had a "chilling effect" on speech;and the Supreme Court agreed ( Meredith Corp. v. FCC) .

There will always be bias in the presentation of the news .It was true then and it is true now . The question really comes down to this ; do we want the overseers to be the final arbiters of the truth ?

I know I skipped #1 (I have no prob w/death penalty, just way it seems to be unequally, and freq unjustly applied)

2. Why do conservs always lump libs together. I'm a lib but fully believe in the Bill of Rights - all 10. And I believe in the right to defend myself - that's not one in which the state has a right to interfere. Firearms: the ultimate in feminine protection.

3. What the hell is wrong with 2 people committed to each other in a monogamous relationship, having the benefits the state gives to such partnerships? To deny it can only be discriminatory.

The death penalty is a horror with so many who've served time & even been on death row only to be exonerated by DNA after years of their life is gone. How horrible to put someone to death and not be certain they are the truly guilty one.

People committed to each other deserve the same benefits as married people. I don't see a thing wrong with allowing them to marry either. It acknowledges their right to be on earth and part of society, just like everyone else. It's not even that big of a deal. Eventually there won't even be such a thing as marriage - just living together. Live and let live! As Ron Paul says: Let government stay out of our personal lives.