New Black Panther Party Leader - ... you want freedom ... kill some crackers

[Sky Dancer]

We don't need news anymore. Any fool with a webcam will do.

 

[Againsheila]

We don't need news anymore. Any fool with a webcam will do.

Have you seen our news lately? Not one of them carried the story about Alberto Lozano. Not one of them has told the true story of the civil war in Kenya....nope our news is filtered by our government. We are now living in what I was taught the Soviet Union was like.

 

[Sky Dancer]

We don't need news anymore. Any fool with a webcam will do.

Have you seen our news lately? Not one of them carried the story about Alberto Lozano. Not one of them has told the true story of the civil war in Kenya....nope our news is filtered by our government. We are now living in what I was taught the Soviet Union was like.

I don't have a TV.

 

[Foxfyre]

Well, there's "educated" and then there is "educated". My grandfather was a self educated man and he was the smartest man I ever knew. Never went to college but he could converse intelligently on ANY topic.

But would you agree that people who watch ONLY MSNBC and ONLY read Daily Kos, Huffington Post, and Salon.com are going to be less well informed than those who read these and also watch Fox and/or also listen to some good conservative talk radio? And that would be true despite their formal education level or IQ?

And when Fox is the ONLY major news sources carrying some of this stuff, those who don't watch at all are going to be very uninformed on some of it.

Fox isn't #1 and miles ahead of everybody else because it's conservative. It is miles ahead because it is covering all the news and not just the leftwing politically correct stuff.

To be perfectly honest, I've given up on television news. I get my news from the net. Newspapers, the BBC, whatever. I also get a lot of information from various posts here when they put in the links. I sure wouldn't have known about the NBP intimidating voters if it weren't for the video links here.

I do follow all the alphabet networks, their subsidiaries, and CNN and Fox because they've got access to world news feeds and every once in awhile actually do some decent investigative reporting. I don't trust them to always identify what needs to be reported and, with the exception of Fox, I don't trust them to be nonjudgmental in what they think we the public should be informed of. Fox hands down does the best job overall of putting it all out there, pro and con, good and bad, without ideological filtering.

All of these of course are on line so I get as much here as actually watching the broadcast.

And I do supplement that with WSJ and Times on line and some sites that are doing superb research such as Breitbart, occasionally Drudge, WSJ online, and others as well as newspapers, some of which aren't any more reliable to tell it like it really is than are some of the networks.

 

[Sky Dancer]

But would you agree that people who watch ONLY MSNBC and ONLY read Daily Kos, Huffington Post, and Salon.com are going to be less well informed than those who read these and also watch Fox and/or also listen to some good conservative talk radio? And that would be true despite their formal education level or IQ?

And when Fox is the ONLY major news sources carrying some of this stuff, those who don't watch at all are going to be very uninformed on some of it.

Fox isn't #1 and miles ahead of everybody else because it's conservative. It is miles ahead because it is covering all the news and not just the leftwing politically correct stuff.

To be perfectly honest, I've given up on television news. I get my news from the net. Newspapers, the BBC, whatever. I also get a lot of information from various posts here when they put in the links. I sure wouldn't have known about the NBP intimidating voters if it weren't for the video links here.

I do follow all the alphabet networks, their subsidiaries, and CNN and Fox because they've got access to world news feeds and every once in awhile actually do some decent investigative reporting. I don't trust them to always identify what needs to be reported and, with the exception of Fox, I don't trust them to be nonjudgmental in what they think we the public should be informed of. Fox hands down does the best job overall of putting it all out there, pro and con, good and bad, without ideological filtering.

All of these of course are on line so I get as much here as actually watching the broadcast.

And I do supplement that with WSJ and Times on line and some sites that are doing superb research such as Breitbart, occasionally Drudge, WSJ online, and others as well as newspapers, some of which aren't any more reliable to tell it like it really is than are some of the networks.

Fox is biased.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fox_News_Channel_controversies

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

To be perfectly honest, I've given up on television news. I get my news from the net. Newspapers, the BBC, whatever. I also get a lot of information from various posts here when they put in the links. I sure wouldn't have known about the NBP intimidating voters if it weren't for the video links here.

I do follow all the alphabet networks, their subsidiaries, and CNN and Fox because they've got access to world news feeds and every once in awhile actually do some decent investigative reporting. I don't trust them to always identify what needs to be reported and, with the exception of Fox, I don't trust them to be nonjudgmental in what they think we the public should be informed of. Fox hands down does the best job overall of putting it all out there, pro and con, good and bad, without ideological filtering.

All of these of course are on line so I get as much here as actually watching the broadcast.

And I do supplement that with WSJ and Times on line and some sites that are doing superb research such as Breitbart, occasionally Drudge, WSJ online, and others as well as newspapers, some of which aren't any more reliable to tell it like it really is than are some of the networks.

Fox is biased.
Fox News Channel and journalism ethics and standards - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

wikipedia isn't a good source....check out this link.

Electoral fraud - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Look at the opening in the article....it says "For Sky_Dancer"

See anyone can put anything they want on a wiki page

 

[Againsheila]

To be perfectly honest, I've given up on television news. I get my news from the net. Newspapers, the BBC, whatever. I also get a lot of information from various posts here when they put in the links. I sure wouldn't have known about the NBP intimidating voters if it weren't for the video links here.

I do follow all the alphabet networks, their subsidiaries, and CNN and Fox because they've got access to world news feeds and every once in awhile actually do some decent investigative reporting. I don't trust them to always identify what needs to be reported and, with the exception of Fox, I don't trust them to be nonjudgmental in what they think we the public should be informed of. Fox hands down does the best job overall of putting it all out there, pro and con, good and bad, without ideological filtering.

All of these of course are on line so I get as much here as actually watching the broadcast.

And I do supplement that with WSJ and Times on line and some sites that are doing superb research such as Breitbart, occasionally Drudge, WSJ online, and others as well as newspapers, some of which aren't any more reliable to tell it like it really is than are some of the networks.

Fox is biased.
Fox News Channel and journalism ethics and standards - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

So are the rest of them.

 

[Sky Dancer]

I do follow all the alphabet networks, their subsidiaries, and CNN and Fox because they've got access to world news feeds and every once in awhile actually do some decent investigative reporting. I don't trust them to always identify what needs to be reported and, with the exception of Fox, I don't trust them to be nonjudgmental in what they think we the public should be informed of. Fox hands down does the best job overall of putting it all out there, pro and con, good and bad, without ideological filtering.

All of these of course are on line so I get as much here as actually watching the broadcast.

And I do supplement that with WSJ and Times on line and some sites that are doing superb research such as Breitbart, occasionally Drudge, WSJ online, and others as well as newspapers, some of which aren't any more reliable to tell it like it really is than are some of the networks.

Fox is biased.
Fox News Channel and journalism ethics and standards - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

wikipedia isn't a good source....check out this link.

Electoral fraud - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Look at the opening in the article....it says "For Sky_Dancer"

See anyone can put anything they want on a wiki page

If you check the wiki source I cited you will see plenty of research.. wiki articles vary in 'weightedness'.

 

[Foxfyre]

I do follow all the alphabet networks, their subsidiaries, and CNN and Fox because they've got access to world news feeds and every once in awhile actually do some decent investigative reporting. I don't trust them to always identify what needs to be reported and, with the exception of Fox, I don't trust them to be nonjudgmental in what they think we the public should be informed of. Fox hands down does the best job overall of putting it all out there, pro and con, good and bad, without ideological filtering.

All of these of course are on line so I get as much here as actually watching the broadcast.

And I do supplement that with WSJ and Times on line and some sites that are doing superb research such as Breitbart, occasionally Drudge, WSJ online, and others as well as newspapers, some of which aren't any more reliable to tell it like it really is than are some of the networks.

Fox is biased.
Fox News Channel and journalism ethics and standards - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

So are the rest of them.

Yes, but Fox is nowwhere nearly as biased as most of the mainstream news sources, and it certainly is more reliabile and trustworthy than is a Wiki article and far less biased than any political internet site.

This is perhaps the most comprehensive study that has been done on the mainstream media in the last decade:
Media Bias Is Real, Finds UCLA Political Scientist / UCLA Newsroom

 

[Sky Dancer]

Fox is biased.
Fox News Channel and journalism ethics and standards - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

So are the rest of them.

Yes, but Fox is nowwhere nearly as biased as most of the mainstream news sources, and it certainly is more reliabile and trustworthy than is a Wiki article and far less biased than any political internet site.

This is perhaps the most comprehensive study that has been done on the mainstream media in the last decade:
Media Bias Is Real, Finds UCLA Political Scientist / UCLA Newsroom

You think Fox is reliable because it leans right and that's your persuasion. It's just human nature, I suppose. I like to read both sides and find my own view. What's frustrating is to find unbiased news sources. I've been known to change my mind with new information.

 

[The Infidel]

I just thought this was worth repeating

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

I just thought this was worth repeating

+1

Allright guys this thread was a blast.

I've said what I had to say, given the links to evidence, and generally gone in circles for the last 15 posts.

Considering the black panthers are a very small violent and vocal minority, who are unrespresentative of the american populace as a whole, i'm going to relegate them to the hole I've thrown the KKK in and walk away.

 

[Foxfyre]

So are the rest of them.

Yes, but Fox is nowwhere nearly as biased as most of the mainstream news sources, and it certainly is more reliabile and trustworthy than is a Wiki article and far less biased than any political internet site.

This is perhaps the most comprehensive study that has been done on the mainstream media in the last decade:
Media Bias Is Real, Finds UCLA Political Scientist / UCLA Newsroom

You think Fox is reliable because it leans right and you lean right. It's just human nature I suppose.

I provided you a link to back up my opinion. In all due respect, you don't know what I think or why I think it. All you have to go on is what anybody here has to go on which is what any of us post.

But I'm going to take Pilgrim's cue and back off the thread at this point. Our friends are absolutely right that it has been hopelessly derailed, and I apologize for my part in that happening.

The fact that the incident did not receive fair and balanced treatment from any mainstream news source BUT Fox, and in fact received almost no coverage at all except for Fox is relevent to the thread.

Evaluation of whether these guys were or were not intimidating at a polling place is relevant to this thread. The fact that some will defend them and argue that their presence was not a problem is relevant to this thread. The fact that those who defend them would most likely not defend a Tea Partier or Minuteman or NRA representative behaving in the same manner is relevant to this thread.

The issue of who is and isn't the most biased news source is not relevant and belongs elsewhere on a separate thread.

So adieu everybody until somebody has something new and interesting to offer.

 

[Ravi]

Thanks for ending the thread with humor, Foxfyre...Fox - fair and balanced. bwahahahaha

 

[hortysir]

Crap!
I deleted the e-mail from ColorOfChange.
They're whining that CNN is jumping on FOX's "race-baiting" badwagon by reporting the whole story

 

[Immanuel]

Crap!
I deleted the e-mail from ColorOfChange.
They're whining that CNN is jumping on FOX's "race-baiting" badwagon by reporting the whole story

Never heard of this group.

ColorOfChange.org

What Is ColorOfChange.org?

ColorOfChange.org exists to strengthen Black America's political voice. Our goal is to empower our members—Black Americans and our allies—to make government more responsive to the concerns of Black Americans and to bring about positive political and social change for everyone.

We were heart-broken and outraged by the catastrophe that followed Hurricane Katrina. And we were devastated to realize that no African-American organization or coalition had the capacity to respond on the necessary scale.

Hurricane Katrina made it clear that our lack of a political voice has life-and-death consequences. With no one to speak for them, hundreds of thousands of people—largely Black, poor, and elderly—were left behind to die. But it wasn't just Black folks. Poor, sick, and elderly people of every color were abandoned too. We are not alone, and when we work to protect Black lives and interests, we do the same for all who have been left behind in political silence.

ColorOfChange.org is comprised of Black folks from every economic class, as well as those of every color who seek to help our voices be heard. Our members are united behind a simple, powerful pledge: we will do all we can to make sure all Americans are represented, served, and protected—regardless of race or class.

Underlining by me.

There are things that I like when I read that.

I don't know any more than that about this organization, but the stated goals at least leave some hope.

Immie

 

[hortysir]

Crap!
I deleted the e-mail from ColorOfChange.
They're whining that CNN is jumping on FOX's "race-baiting" badwagon by reporting the whole story

Never heard of this group.

ColorOfChange.org

What Is ColorOfChange.org?

ColorOfChange.org exists to strengthen Black America's political voice. Our goal is to empower our members—Black Americans and our allies—to make government more responsive to the concerns of Black Americans and to bring about positive political and social change for everyone.

We were heart-broken and outraged by the catastrophe that followed Hurricane Katrina. And we were devastated to realize that no African-American organization or coalition had the capacity to respond on the necessary scale.

Hurricane Katrina made it clear that our lack of a political voice has life-and-death consequences. With no one to speak for them, hundreds of thousands of people—largely Black, poor, and elderly—were left behind to die. But it wasn't just Black folks. Poor, sick, and elderly people of every color were abandoned too. We are not alone, and when we work to protect Black lives and interests, we do the same for all who have been left behind in political silence.

ColorOfChange.org is comprised of Black folks from every economic class, as well as those of every color who seek to help our voices be heard. Our members are united behind a simple, powerful pledge: we will do all we can to make sure all Americans are represented, served, and protected—regardless of race or class.

Underlining by me.

There are things that I like when I read that.

I don't know any more than that about this organization, but the stated goals at least leave some hope.

Immie

All-in-all they DO stand for some fair stuff.
That's why I subscribed, to begin with.

Once in a blue-moon they veer off into some affirmative action crap I don't agree with.
Right now they have a campaign against the big internet-provider merging.

More recently they've been trying to get advertisers to drop Glenn Beck.
(Van Jones was one of it's founders)

 

[ConHog]

I just thought this was worth repeating

+1

Allright guys this thread was a blast.

I've said what I had to say, given the links to evidence, and generally gone in circles for the last 15 posts.

Considering the black panthers are a very small violent and vocal minority, who are unrespresentative of the american populace as a whole, i'm going to relegate them to the hole I've thrown the KKK in and walk away.

That would be the thing to do if you didn't have a friggin AG and President who oppose investigating crimes committed by them. You can be sure that if a dude in a hood down in Alabama was standing on the town square talking about hangin some ******* there would be an FBI investigation. You can be sure that if that hooded dude was standing at a polling station whacking a baton and yelling racial slurs, there would be a trial........

 

[KMAN]

Lawyer: Black Panther case shows civil rights of white voters are ignored - The Oakland Press News: The best place for news in and around Oakland County

 

[logical4u]

Really? From my perspective it is far less "stupid" than Mel Gibson, Lindsay Lohan and Lebton James. We all knew about that!

But even stupider is the group of militia men that got caught plotting against the police and the government...right?

The Bill Ayers gang?