[biosurfer1]

[quote name='flash' timestamp='1415295724' post='163497']

any job is better than no job

[/quote]



That is the problem with welfare, that statement isn't true. Welfare gives so much now (and for 99 weeks) that it is often times more profitable to sit around at home and do nothing rather than get a job. It's the mentality of some people these days, it used to be welfare was a helping hand until you got back on your feet, now its a way of life.



The real problem is how do you provide a program for those who really do use welfare the way it was designed, while weeding out those who just want a free ride?

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[paulzebo]

"re: fox news - not a chance - not even close to #1. abc is #1 (i don't watch that one either though - i'm a nbc guy for the most part - not msnbc either)."



Don't know where you're getting that data. The LA Times says "[size=4]TV ratings: Fox News wins, CNN surges to No. 2 in cable news in August" [/size]http://www.latimes.c...0903-story.html



TVnewser Says: http://www.mediabist...ategory/ratings



RATINGS



[b]The Scoreboard: Wednesday, November 5[/b]



By Chris Ariens on November 6, 2014 4:46 PM



25-54 demographic (Live +SD)

• Total day: FNC: 429 | CNN: 102 | MSNBC: 108 | HLN: 89
  
  

• Primetime: FNC: 666 | CNN: 124 | MSNBC: 214 | HLN: 106
  
  

​Maybe you are referring to overall network viewership and not just the news? The most popular shows are not even the news.

   

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[flash]

that's cable news, not all news. that's like saying they are the biggest fish in the tiny pond.



as an indicator of how many people realize that fox news is not where to go to get your political input, scroll down toward the bottom of this where it shows political talk shows:



http://stateofthemed...by-the-numbers/

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[flash]

by the way, i want to pause for a moment to congratulate and thank everyone participating in this thread. with a subject as polarized as politics, it's very impressive to see that everyone has done a good job of keeping their cool. that just doesn't happen on other sites.

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[lbpesq]

The ranking of FOX news has nothing to do with ratings. If you put the naked news on air, it would get great ratings, but that has nothing to do with the quality of the reporting. The idea that Fox news is actual news is just inaccurate. It is agenda-driven propaganda. Nothing more, nothing less.

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[ds968]

[quote name='lbpesq' timestamp='1415376197' post='163534']

If you put the naked news on air, it would get great ratings, but that has nothing to do with the quality of the reporting.

[/quote]



not necessarily true, so I think I must watch that channel a lot more frequently in order to reach my own conclusions relative to the quality of the reporting. <img src="/forum/images/smilies/968/tongue.png" class="smilie" alt="" />

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[paulzebo]

"that's cable news, not all news. that's like saying they are the biggest fish in the tiny pond."



not on election night. They were the largest among broadcast/cable combined.



Midterm Election TV Ratings: Fox News Tops Broadcast Nets; Beats Cablers Combined



By Chris Ariens on November 5, 2014 4:51 PM

Fox News Channel was the most-watched network — on broadcast and on cable — during coverage of the midterm elections.

• 10pmET: (Total Viewers | A25-54 demo)
  
  

FNC: 6,607,000 / 1,825,000 A25-54



CBS: 5,408,000 / 1,548,000 in 25-54

NBC: 4,225,000 / 1,484,000 in 25-54

ABC: 3,147,000 / 1,083,000 in 25-54

CNN: 1,936,000 / 912,000 in 25-54

MSNBC: 1,594,000 / 566,000 in 25-54

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[flash]

well, people seem to love made up psuedo-reality, so i guess that sort of makes sense. based on the rest of their programming, i think they are targeting the tv wrestling and tyler perry crowd. less educated and consequently easier to fool. nobody i know with an IQ higher than a doorknob pays much attention to it though. they see it for the self-serving "agenda-driven propaganda" that it is.



it's easy to sell vanilla to people who have not had chocolate.

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[Chris Vais]

About the only news show that I watch these days is BBC America World News. Insightful reporting and no opinions.

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[flash]

yup - when i'm traveling, it's that and cnn.

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[968Syncro]

[size=3]If You Really Think It Matters Which Party Controls the Senate, Answer These Questions (November 6, 2014) [/size]



[size=2]http://www.oftwominds.com/blognov14/what-changed11-14.html[/size]



"1. Will U.S. foreign policy in the Mideast change from being an incoherent pastiche of endless war and Imperial meddling?



2. Will basic civil liberties be returned to the citizenry?



3. Will the predatory, parasitic policies of the Federal Reserve that virtually everyone from the Wall Street Journal to what little remains of the authentic Left understands has greatly increased income and wealth inequality be reined in?



4. Will the steaming pile of profiteering, corruption, waste, fraud and ineptitude that is Sickcare in the U.S. be truly reformed so its costs drop by 50% to match what every other developed democracy spends per person on universal healthcare?



5. Will the influence of Big Money be well and truly banned from politics?



6. Will the incentives in the Status Quo be reset to punish rapacious financialization and gaming the system and reward productive investment and labor?



7. Will anything be done to dismantle the Neofeudal Debt-Serfdom known as student loans?



8. Will any prudent assessment be made of unaffordable weapons systems like the F-35 Lightning--$1.5 trillion and counting for aircraft that will soon be matched by drones that cost a fraction of the F-35's $200 million a piece price tag?



If none of these key dynamics will change, you got nothing. Please don't claim anything changes if one party or the other is in the majority. Anyone clinging to that fantasy is delusional.

"



Roland's comment: For the first time in about 30 years I didn't vote -- useless, I am so sick of our dysfunctional governments.

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[flash]

what we have is the worst form of government...............except for all the rest

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[ds968]

[quote name='968Syncro' timestamp='1415403278' post='163542']]Roland's comment: For the first time in about 30 years I didn't vote -- useless, I am so sick of our dysfunctional governments.[/color][/font][/i][/size][/quote]



Bingo ! Exactly as I mentioned it my previous post as to the reason I have not voted for any given congressional or presidential race for a long time - no matter who is in charge, the big picture and the system will not change - if you think your vote ( on a national level ) will ever make a difference you're in denial and delusional .

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[flash]

yup - until we get rid of the electoral college, it really doesn't matter what presidential candidate the people vote for. that was a crappy compromise, though i suppose it was better than what the founding fathers wanted, which was to elect the president by a vote in congress. the end result though is almost the same.



p.s. - they never intended for everyone to be able to vote. they intended only for "qualified" voters to have that ability. based on what i've seen, i'm not sure they were wrong.

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[lbpesq]

The older I get, the more cynical I become about our government. I suspect that when a new President first moves into the White House, they take him in the back room, sit him down, and explain to him how it really is. I'm getting to the point where the only difference I perceive between Tweedle Dum and Tweedle Dee as President is Supreme Court appointments.



Bill

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[ds968]

Ah, the Supreme Court ..there's another debate going on as to term limits for them as well. Term limits for congress has been, and continues to be favored by the overwhelming majority of people in this country, yet that never seems to happen ..hmm, I wonder why that is...oh yeah, I forget who gets to vote on that initiative passing , LOL. But there seems to be a greater division among people's opinions when it comes to the Supreme Court judges . IMO, lifetime appointments are for monarchies/ dynasties, the pope, the Kim Jongs , etc - why judges ? Either that or we should at least have the ability to vote for their continuance or dismissal from the court .

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[lbpesq]

Lifetime appointments are to insure integrity and an absence of bias. When judges have to run for election like politicians, they fall victim to the same realities as politicians. Those who give the most money get the most favors. Such a reality is especially troubling in the judicial system. Similarly, if a SC Justice knows they are out the door in X number of years, it creates an incentive to rule in favor of a potential future employer. Only a justice who has lifetime security can truly be counted on to be unaffected by pressure from the other branches of gov't.

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[ds968]

The government can provide continuance of their salaries at 100% for the rest of their lives if necessary, to guarantee that lifetime security and thus mitigate any potential bias stemming from future interests, but I don't think allowing some senile or clearly activist judge to stay on the bench and continue to make decisions which may be biased anyway based on their personal beliefs is a heathy m.o. Voters should have a say so in all political appointments ( not necessarily the initial term, but subsequent terms continuance or ability to remove one from the bench) IMHO :-)

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[ds968]

I was just going through the latest issue of Esquire magazine and ran across an article on the " hell " that is our Congress ; the author ( Mark Warren ) interviewed 90 members of congress in preparation for the article and the revelations are disturbing, to say the least, and yet not at all surprising - the article is readily available online and I could not find a single note re copyright protection associated with it, so I presume I am not violating any copyright provisions by posting the link here, particularly with full reference to the magazine and author, which again , is available free to anyone and everyone online, without having to buy the magazine ...however, if it is an issue, I trust one of the moderators will delete the link and just leave the reference to the magazine and the article so others can buy it and read it themselves.

Link : http://www.esquire.com/blogs/politics/co...-hell-1114

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[biosurfer1]

[quote name='ds968' timestamp='1415484686' post='163550']

The government can provide continuance of their salaries at 100% for the rest of their lives if necessary, to guarantee that lifetime security and thus mitigate any potential bias stemming from future interests

[/quote]



All of the SCOTUS judges stand to make much, much more money in private practices or just giving speeches, so I don't think its about the money. It's about the power.



I love reading the dissenting opinions on what would seem to be a no brainer vote, they never let me down in thinking about effects that may not be obvious. Ginsberg does this the best, IMHO.

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.