published Sunday, February 27th, 2011

Safety First

about Clay Bennett...

The son of a career army officer, Bennett led a nomadic life, attending ten different schools before graduating in 1980 from the University of North Alabama with degrees in Art and History. After brief stints as a staff artist at the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette and the Fayetteville (NC) Times, he went on to serve as the editorial cartoonist for the St. Petersburg Times (1981-1994) and The Christian Science Monitor (1997-2007), before joining the staff of the ...

Comments do not represent the opinions of the Chattanooga Times Free Press, nor does it review every comment. Profanities, slurs and libelous remarks are prohibited. For more information you can view our Terms & Conditions and/or Ethics policy.
alprova said...

Fox News Top Ten Lie Countdown

10.) While airing live footage of a press conference by South Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford, in the hot seat for cheating on his wife, Live Desk incorrectly identified the Republican as a Democrat. [Fox News does this routinely.]

09.) Live Desk: "Dems and Unions Push to Kill Workers' Right to Secret Ballot," was exclaimed during a report on the Employee Free Choice Act. In fact, the proposed law gives workers a choice of forming a union through majority sign-up (card check) or an election by secret ballot.

08.) America's Newsroom falsely claimed in on-screen text that President Obama's 2010 budget proposal of $3.6 trillion for year 2010 was "4 times bigger than Bush's costliest plan." In fact, President Bush submitted a $3.1 trillion budget proposal for year 2009 and a $2.9 trillion budget proposal for year 2008.

07.) America's Newsroom: On April 2, 2009, guest host Alisyn Camerota stated that "Obama's cap-and-trade proposal would cost $3,100 per U.S. household." But MIT professor John Reilly has disputed the GOP's calculation of an average household cost of $3,128 is "nearly 10 times the correct estimate" based on his study's cap-and-trade model. rated the $3,100 figure a "pants on fire" falsehood.

06.) Fox News, in 2008, reported a completely unsubstantiated rumor that Obama was raised in a Muslim madrasah. Obama attended the school for two years as a child when he was 6 years of age.

05.) When the 9/12 Tea Party march on DC was being reported on air by Fox News, the numbers of attendees reported were to be 1.5 million to 1.7 million. In fact, the true number of attendees was between 60,000 and 70,000.

04.) When the false "death panel" rumors started in August, 2009, Fox News reported on a supposed, "death book" put out by the Veterans Health Administration. The book proved them to be totally lying.

03.) In March 2009, Fox News purposely altered the timeline of a statement made by Vice-President Joe Biden. "the fundamentals of the economy are strong" was actually from the campaign, stated during 2008, and selectively edited By Fox News to seem more recent.

02.) Fox News repeatedly reported that Kevin Jennings, an Assistant Deputy Secretary at the U.S. Department of Education, was told by a 15 year old boy that he was having sexual encounters with older men and that Jennings failed to report this conversation to proper authorities. Th fact was that the boy wasn't 15. He was above the legal age of consent.

01.) Fox's reporters repeatedly claimed that Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan, had banned military recruiters from Harvard Law School's campus while Dean. The truth was that Kagan had briefly banned the school's Office of Career Services from working with military recruiters -- she never banned ANY recruiters from Harvard's campus.

February 27, 2011 at 4:55 a.m.
Francis said...

alprova...whether there were 2 people or 2 million people at the march on 9/12 doesnt't matter... on 11/2/10...they stopped obama's agenda cold, didn't they?

you say you "write your own material".....and you think no one can come to a conclusion that leads to a different opinion than yours, or....have a conservative viewpoint without being told what to say by fox news or some other place, but the stuff you write sounds just like msnbc, cnn, abc, nbc, cbs, pbs, ny times, newsweek, time magazine, huffington post or from the lips of george soros or those cows on the view. there's nothing new under the liberal's the same garbage since the early 1900's.

February 27, 2011 at 6:18 a.m.
fairmon said...

I am not a Fox news fan so I don't know what goes on there but I see similar errors on ABC, NBC, CBS, CNBC which I attribute to the rush to be first. A newspaper reporting a criminal charge on the front page will at least bury a retraction or correction somewhere in the paper. TV media rarely admits and corrects an error. I can tell by the post here that some watch and like Fox news and others prefer reporting by the more liberal media. Skepticism of both is probably the best way to view them.

February 27, 2011 at 6:19 a.m.
EaTn said...

Infrequently, when the real news channels get boring and I've seen the reruns of Sanford, Seinfeld or Andy, I switch over to watch some comedy on Fox News. I must say, it's great for a good laugh.

February 27, 2011 at 6:32 a.m.
acerigger said...

Alprova, your "top 10" doesn't scratch the surface of Faux Newz mis-information,check-out .(that is,if you care about the truth)

February 27, 2011 at 6:44 a.m.
ITguy said...

Their lies are either due to incompetence or they are deliberate. In either case, they are inexcusable. Their track record is far worse than any other news outlet, and they do not admit their mistakes. The FCC should revoke their license.

February 27, 2011 at 6:45 a.m.
SeaSmokie59er said...

There are two sides to every story. And then there is the truth. Fox 'NEWS' does selective reporting. For instance they will show an opinion poll that says: 30% of Viewers polled disagree with x (what about the other 70%?). Just my observation.

BTW - In 2007 my crew pulled a 47' sailboat off the rocks in Morro Bay it was live on all the cable news stations (CNN, HSN, MSNBC) execpt Fox, they had 24/7 coverage of the Anna Nicole Smith Tragedy.

February 27, 2011 at 7:06 a.m.
joepulitzer said...


February 27, 2011 at 7:41 a.m.
joepulitzer said...


February 27, 2011 at 7:47 a.m.
Francis said...

i don't watch fox news..i don't have cable or a dish..

you libs act as if someone's natural state or natural state of mind is to be liberal or leftist..and things like fox news just mess it all up.

most comments on this forum are made under the bennett cartoon.....and you libs whine about fox? how much time does bennett spend poking fun at palin, fox news, the tea party, the republican party or anyone else who doesn't fit into the demorat party agenda.

ronald reagan won two elections long, long before fox news came around..or there was any tea party.

fox news is no more incompletant or competant than any of the other networks......they have more conservative voices on there than the other networks...the other networks are completely dominated by liberals...

alprova's list is a joke......alprova might as well be obama's press secretary..

that's list is a smoking gun ..ooooooooooooooo....

if anyone would want to take the time to make a list compiling all the outrageous coverage by the other networks and liberal news would gone on forever..

so get off your high horse.....

once again liberal network good, conservative leaning network bad....

bennett's cartoons have about as much insight as an hour of cackling on the tv show the view.

February 27, 2011 at 7:56 a.m.
dude_abides said...

Watching Fox news is like watching the 700 Club without the donation line number. They don't want your money, just your vote.

Exhibit A) "i don't watch fox news..i don't have cable or a dish.."

Exhibit B) "fox news is no more incompletant(sic) or competant(sic) than any of the other networks......they have more conservative voices on there than the other networks...the other networks are completely dominated by liberals..." (please to explain incongruence?)

February 27, 2011 at 8:26 a.m.
Sailorman said...

Give credit where credit is due. Clay certainly knows how to pander to his rabid followers.

February 27, 2011 at 8:40 a.m.
Eddo said...

Let's look at these one by one: 09. The unions are pushing to implement formation of a union THROUGH THE USE OF CARD CHECK ONLY! 07. So who's correct? All we have here is a difference of opinion. 06. Maybe not a madrassah but you can't dispute the fact that Obama's development was in a very formative stage at that age. Impressions made during those years of age tend to remain into adulthood. 05. The attendance figure depends on which source you believe. I notice you do not cite yours. 04. The guidebook was sufficiently incorrect to prompt a recall and rewrite. 03. Simple "spin" used by both parties. 02. 15 years or 21 years, the acts were still occurring. 01. If university career counselors cannot work with military recruiters it inhibits recruiting! Might as well ban the ROTC.

February 27, 2011 at 8:57 a.m.
sd said...

Televised news is for smucks. You heard it here first.

If you hate FOX and just luuuuv CNN, or hate CNN and just luuuuv FOX you are totally missing the point. Televised news is for people that are too lazy to read, and if you're too lazy to read it's no stretch to assume you're intellectually lazy as well. (Yeah, I totally went there.)

February 27, 2011 at 8:57 a.m.
blackwater48 said...

A recent Gallop poll showed 61% FAVORED collective bargaining. Fox "News" co-anchor Brian Kilmeade misreported the poll results by claiming that 61% OPPOSED collective bargaining rights.

And it wasn't just an honest mistake. Fox had a graphic breakdown of the phony poll to reinforce the lie. Over 20 minutes later Kilmeade acknowledged the error in a brief statement.

February 27, 2011 at 9:12 a.m.
hotdiggity said...

Nice to have Francis post that Fox news "is no more incompletant or competant than any of the other networks" immediately after saying that "i don't watch fox news..i don't have cable or a dish.."

Since you also cannot watch CNN, a person would naturally question your comparative analysis of the networks as far as competency.

I guess ignorance is bliss. Thanks for your burning insight while ignoring the facts presented about Fox which are easily accessible even without cable/dish TV.

February 27, 2011 at 10:18 a.m.
bret said...

Everyone makes mistakes. FOX NEWS is unique among news organizations, not because they make so many "mistakes," but because 99% of their so-called mistakes err in favor of the Republican party. These aren't just slip-of-the-tongue mistakes ... these are planned fabrications usually accompanied by mislabeled graphs or false text running across the screen.

Many ex-FOX employees have come forward and explained how the reporters are told what to say and how to say it to promote the GOP agenda. So don't call it news when it is really just propaganda. Reminds me of Pravda back in the Soviet days. The sad fact is that we get more truth today from the Al Jazeera network than we do from FOX.

February 27, 2011 at 10:54 a.m.
bret said...


My friends that's what we call "a baldfaced lie." Feel free to prove me wrong with any links to a video where anyone from CNN said this and I will profusely apologize. Absent that, we'll just continue with the knowledge that you are talking out your back side.

February 27, 2011 at 11 a.m.
Francis said...

i never said i've never viewed them...i've watched them in hotels, waiting in line in the bank..etc.. i don't watch them at home..or on the internet...why should i?

but, i do know, nbc, cbs, pbs and all of the other ones that are liberal...made a great team effort to cover up or hide who obama really is....they caught the electorate napping and uninformed.. .....that is bitch about fox, but the liberal media tag teaming to get obama elected was the prime example.

you libs have no standing to criticize fox.

February 27, 2011 at 11:11 a.m.
acerigger said...,truth about faux!

February 27, 2011 at 11:32 a.m.
mountainlaurel said...

There’s scuttlebutt that Fox News boss will be indicted – LIES are involved:

“Legendary FOX News boss Roger Ailes allegedly told underling Judity Regan to lie to federal investigators to protect Rudy Guiliani.

Regan reportedly has a tape of the telephone call in which Ailes urged her to do this.

If this story is true, and the telephone call is clear, Ailes would obviously be exposed to obstruction-of-justice charges.

And now the scuttlebutt is that Ailes will in fact be indicted.”

February 27, 2011 at 12:07 p.m.
OllieH said...

Funny cartoon, Clay.

Francis- Perhaps it's not that the other news networks, but REALITY that tends to reflect a liberal viewpoint. Objective news reporting reflects reality. So, any news organization that actually practices good journalism, might well seem liberal.

It's painfully obvious that Fox News is little more than a propaganda machine for Rupert Murdoch's conservative philosophy.

February 27, 2011 at 12:16 p.m.
EaTn said...

Fox News is like a continuous infomercial for the right-wing element of this country that caters to their audience. That's what an entertainment channel should do, much like a food or home improvement network.

February 27, 2011 at 12:20 p.m.
Francis said...

i don't have to frequent a crackhouse to know what's in it...passing by it is enough.

ollie..what a load of crap. "reality"...the last thing a liberal is qualified to speak on is reality. the entire obama campaign was a destortion of reality and a systematic effort to get him in the white no matter what...facts be damed... history be damned...there has never been a greater example of whoring by the liberal media....and they're still at it.

a propaganda bennett's cartoons?

what is heartening, though, is that in spite of the assault by the liberal media on the american public, by nearly all news sources, to sell us on that jack- ass obama....the american people sized up the last two years and rejected him on nov. 2nd...and big.

the point being..that the news outlets have become white noise....people are tuning out and doing their homework..reading..looking at history and facts....and that DOES NOT bode well for the dem- ocrat party.

February 27, 2011 at 12:40 p.m.
Francis said...

journalism schools pump out journalists who have a liberal point of view...that's a fact. they're dominated by liberal professors who have a negative view of america. nearly every journalist, according to some polls i saw, voted for obama.

isn't juan williams or mara liasson liberal enough for you? they're card carrying liberals.....and they're on fox. the fact is though, according to ratings i've seen the more conservative shows on cable always beat out the ones on cnn , msnbc and the others....why? because liberals are out of touch with reality and cannot be trusted to t ell the truth.

after obama...who's going to trust liberal journalists again?

February 27, 2011 at 12:52 p.m.
Francis said...

fox news, the koch brothers, the tea party/nazis, halliburton, bush/cheney cabal..and on and on and're a conspiratorial wacko, mountainlaurel......and what do you always favors the democrat party and involves the republican party and conservatives. you're a democrat party bootlicker like bennett. nobody cares about that....they care about finding jobs, keeping jobs, keeping what they earn, being able to eat what they want, go where they want, buy what they want, not being told what to do by thugs like obama...and say what they believe without being called a, dems are at odds with what america wants.

February 27, 2011 at 1:01 p.m.
canarysong said...

Harp made a good case for the inadequacy of TV news coverage and SD brought that point home perfectly.The fact is that nearly every news story is too complex to be covered in the time allotted in a typical TV news program. And, sadly, that is about the limit of the average viewer's attention span.

Some print coverage is not much better. Many news magazine stories are just a print version of a 'soundbite'. I'm dropping my subscription to Newsweek out of frustration over their increasing amount of 'fluff'. With Fareed Zakaria gone, it really doesn't seem worth the bother. Despite the conservatives' contempt for The New Yorker, the writing is always top-notch, most stories are covered in more depth than any weekly publication that I've seen, and (as an added bonus) actually contains a word now and then that I have to look up. Just when was it that we moved from stimulating and challenging people to dumbing everything down for them? What happened to the American spirit of striving to be the best that we can be? Or does that now apply only to sports and warfare?

Sorry, I've gone off on a tangent; I'll pull myself together to make this point.... It MATTERS! Democracy is built upon the idea of an informed electorate. Please re-read that last sentence! Democracy cannot long survive ignorance. It leaves the public powerless to understand how to effectively use the system to their benefit and it leaves them vulnerable to the predators that do. I would argue that the responsibility to participate in the democratic process includes, by necessity, the responsibility to properly educate yourself regarding its structure and function, as well as the current issues that are on the table.

Thomas Jefferson felt very strongly about the need for an informed citizenry. Much can be read about his views on the subject, but this quote sums it up very well:

"If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be." (as cited in Padover, 1939, p. 89)

February 27, 2011 at 1:15 p.m.
ITguy said...

The goal of journalism is to tell the truth. I will grant you that there are journalists who are liberal. However, I think that is a natural result of being well educated.

It is one thing to be biased. It is another to be mistaken. Fox goes beyond bias, they just make stuff up. I think that it was Mark Twain who said "a lie will travel around the world before the truth can put on it's shoes", or words to that effect. The propagandists take advantage of this and intentionally tell lies that they can latter retract. They know that once something is said, it will be remembered and repeated. There are people who still believe that Saddam was involved in 9/11.

Friends, lies are evil things. It amazes me that people who claim to be God fearing tolerate lies when told in support of their agenda. Lies are evil no matter who is telling the lie.

As informed citizens, we should always seek the truth. Our opinions should be based on truth. It is the role of journalism to tell the truth.

February 27, 2011 at 1:22 p.m.
alprova said...

Harp3339 wrote: "I am not a Fox news fan so I don't know what goes on there but I see similar errors on ABC, NBC, CBS, CNBC which I attribute to the rush to be first."

I'm sorry Harp, but you can't make that claim with a straight face. No network out there has the track record that Fox News has, in terms of being caught intentionally slanting reports, falsifying material presented on air, and for making convenient "mistakes" that leave the wrong impression on people's minds.

Francis wrote: "i don't watch fox news..i don't have cable or a dish.."

That pretty much disqualifies any and all of your statements about Fox News after the above declaration. There is such a thing as commenting from an informed perspective, and then there are statements made from a completely ignorant perspective. You seem to be unaware of that, just about every time you post.

Francis wrote: "if anyone would want to take the time to make a list compiling all the outrageous coverage by the other networks and liberal news outlets...

Dare we expect you to back that statement up with proof, or are we to expect that you're just typing whatever comes to that feeble mind of yours on any given day? You never prove anything. Most people have the runs emanating from elsewhere on their body.

February 27, 2011 at 1:52 p.m.
canarysong said...

"It is one thing to be biased. It is another to be mistaken. Fox goes beyond bias, they just make stuff up."---ItGuy

And to support his point I'd like to quote that great contemporary American philosopher Bill Maher :) "You are entitled to your own opinions; you're not entitled to your own facts."

February 27, 2011 at 1:56 p.m.
dude_abides said...

Ouch! Alprova, did you just refer to Francis as diarrheactionary? Francis must spend lots of time at the bank, if that's the only place he gets his Fox indoctrination. It is an embarrassment that people all over the world can see the crap that a certain percentage of us gobble up from that cesspool, not unlike the way we perceive hordes of ululating Arab mourners, or albinos killed in witch hunts. Of course, our rep is shot after Bush II anyway.

February 27, 2011 at 2:34 p.m.
canarysong said...

Francis; "....that jack- ass obama....the american people sized up the last two years and rejected him on nov. 2nd...and big."

Sorry to frustrate you with reality, Francis, but it was more congress that the voters rejected, rather than President Obama. Polls consistently show the president with a higher approval rating than congress, among both liberals and conservatives.

According to a Gallup report of Oct. 15, 2010 (shortly before the midterm election): "Today and throughout his time in office, President Obama has received a substantially higher approval rating from the American people than has Congress. The average 26-point gap between the two thus far into Obama's term is substantially higher than Gallup has found during most recent administrations."

Hmmm..., might that have something to do with the fact that one party has made it their admitted number one priority to stonewall progress and bring down our democratically elected leader, seemly at any cost to the public well-being?

February 27, 2011 at 2:55 p.m.
ITguy said...

Canary, don't confuse Francis with the facts, he has already made up his mind.

February 27, 2011 at 3:31 p.m.

Does the cartoon make a mountain out of a mole hill? The research indicates that Bennett’s premise is based on highly selective observations.

Exhibit A:

“Media Bias Is Real, Finds UCLA Political Scientist” by Meg Sullivan (UCLA News Release, December 14, 2005)

"I suspected that many media outlets would tilt to the left because surveys have shown that reporters tend to vote more Democrat than Republican," said Tim Groseclose, a UCLA political scientist and the study's lead author. "But I was surprised at just how pronounced the distinctions are."

"Overall, the major media outlets are quite moderate compared to members of Congress, but even so, there is a quantifiable and significant bias in that nearly all of them lean to the left," said co‑author Jeffrey Milyo, University of Missouri economist and public policy scholar.

The results appear in the latest issue of the Quarterly Journal of Economics, which will become available in mid-December [2005].

Groseclose and Milyo based their research on a standard gauge of a lawmaker's support for liberal causes. Americans for Democratic Action (ADA) tracks the percentage of times that each lawmaker votes on the liberal side of an issue. Based on these votes, the ADA assigns a numerical score to each lawmaker, where "100" is the most liberal and "0" is the most conservative. After adjustments to compensate for disproportionate representation that the Senate gives to low‑population states and the lack of representation for the District of Columbia, the average ADA score in Congress (50.1) was assumed to represent the political position of the average U.S. voter.

Groseclose and Milyo then directed 21 research assistants — most of them college students — to scour U.S. media coverage of the past 10 years. They tallied the number of times each media outlet referred to think tanks and policy groups, such as the left-leaning NAACP or the right-leaning Heritage Foundation.

Next, they did the same exercise with speeches of U.S. lawmakers. If a media outlet displayed a citation pattern similar to that of a lawmaker, then Groseclose and Milyo's method assigned both a similar ADA score.

"A media person would have never done this study," said Groseclose, a UCLA political science professor, whose research and teaching focuses on the U.S. Congress. "It takes a Congress scholar even to think of using ADA scores as a measure. And I don't think many media scholars would have considered comparing news stories to congressional speeches."

February 27, 2011 at 4:51 p.m.

“Media Bias Is Real, Finds UCLA Political Scientist” by Meg Sullivan


Of the 20 major media outlets studied, 18 scored left of center, with CBS' "Evening News," The New York Times and the Los Angeles Times ranking second, third and fourth most liberal behind the news pages of The Wall Street Journal.

Only Fox News' "Special Report With Brit Hume" and The Washington Times scored right of the average U.S. voter.

The most centrist outlet proved to be the "NewsHour With Jim Lehrer." CNN's "NewsNight With Aaron Brown" and ABC's "Good Morning America" were a close second and third.

"Our estimates for these outlets, we feel, give particular credibility to our efforts, as three of the four moderators for the 2004 presidential and vice-presidential debates came from these three news outlets — Jim Lehrer, Charlie Gibson and Gwen Ifill," Groseclose said. "If these newscasters weren't centrist, staffers for one of the campaign teams would have objected and insisted on other moderators."

The fourth most centrist outlet was "Special Report With Brit Hume" on Fox News, which often is cited by liberals as an egregious example of a right-wing outlet. While this news program proved to be right of center, the study found ABC's "World News Tonight" and NBC's "Nightly News" to be left of center. All three outlets were approximately equidistant from the center, the report found.

"If viewers spent an equal amount of time watching Fox's 'Special Report' as ABC's 'World News' and NBC's 'Nightly News,' then they would receive a nearly perfectly balanced version of the news," said Milyo, an associate professor of economics and public affairs at the University of Missouri at Columbia.

February 27, 2011 at 4:53 p.m.

My main news source is NPR, though I do miss The News Hour on PBS, and C-SPAN Book TV. Since I kissed TV goodbye, however, I have more time to read.

Whatever the lies and biases of Fox News, I think the evidence is pretty clear that for every Fox News, there are a dozen or more influential media outlets presenting equally egregious fabrications from the left. There are several web sites which provide more recent evidence of the findings of this study.

The study was published in 2005. There may be similar, more recent studies, but I couldn’t find them in the time I had to look. I doubt if the trends have altered significantly.

Below is the summary of the entire report, which is found online at:

A Measure of Media Bias

Dr. Tim Groseclose, UCLA and Stanford University

Dr. Jeff Milyo, University of Chicago

“Our results show a very significant liberal bias. All of the news outlets except Fox News’ Special Report received a score to the left of the average member of Congress. Moreover, by one of our measures all but three of these media outlets (Special Report, the Drudge Report, and ABC’s World News Tonight) were closer to the average Democrat in Congress than to the median member of the House of Representatives. One of our measures found that the Drudge Report is the most centrist of all media outlets in our sample. Our other measure found that Fox News’ Special Report is the most centrist …

“One of the most curious and surprising statistics in all of American politics is that an overwhelming number of journalists are liberal. For instance, Elaine Povich (1996) reports that only seven percent of all Washington correspondents voted for George Bush in 1992, compared to 37 percent of the American public. Lichter, Rothman and Lichter, (1986) and Weaver and Wilhoit (1996) report similar findings for earlier elections.

“The reason this statistic is curious and surprising is that many consider the media the watchdog of government, sometimes calling it the “Fourth Branch of American Government.” If so, it is by far the least representative of the branches …

“Although we expected to find that most media lean left, we were astounded by the degree. A norm among journalists is to present “both sides of the issue.” Consequently, while we expected members of Congress to cite primarily think tanks that are on the same side of the ideological spectrum as they are, we expected journalists to practice a much more balanced citation practice, even if the journalist’s own ideology opposed the think tanks that he or she is sometimes citing. This was not always the case. Most of the mainstream media outlets that we examined (i.e. all those besides Drudge Report and Fox News’ Special Report) were closer to the average Democrat in Congress than they were to the median member of the House.”

February 27, 2011 at 5:16 p.m.
mountainlaurel said...

Francis said: “Fox news, the koch brothers, the tea party/Nazis, hallibuton, bush/cheney cabal..and on and on andon….you’re a conspiratorial waco.”

You just don’t get it, do you, Francis? . . . It’s all about ethics, responsibility, and accountability. . . What else can I say? . . . Don't you want these things too?

Most people expect news to be straightforward and reasonably factual. The Fox channel gives us non-factual and slanderous fiction with malicious intent.

Most people are truly concerned about the problems involving contaminated drinking water, air pollution, and cancerous causing poisonous products – Koch Industries is directly responsible for creating these kinds of problems.

Most people expect their President to be honest in matters involving war, but President George W. Bush lied and a lot of people died unnecessarily.

February 27, 2011 at 5:24 p.m.

mountainlaurel said...

"Most people expect their President to be honest in matters involving war, but President George W. Bush lied and a lot of people died unnecessarily."

Um. I dare say that your historical knowledge about presidents and wars is quite limited.

February 27, 2011 at 5:54 p.m.
blackwater48 said...

WWWTW wrote to ML, "Um. I dare say that your historical knowledge about presidents and wars is quite limited."

Um, name the reason we invaded Iraq.

February 27, 2011 at 7:09 p.m.

Name one president who has been completely honest in matters of war.

February 27, 2011 at 7:18 p.m.
bret said...

On Saturday there were rallies held all over the country in support of the teachers and union workers in Wisconsin. The Wisconsin rally drew more people than any Tea Party rally ever has and yet FOX NEWS didn't even mention it. I wonder why?

February 27, 2011 at 7:24 p.m.
trburrows said...

fox news and you libs are all the same. not one of you has backed up what you post. pure hogwash. and i dont mean fox news

February 27, 2011 at 7:27 p.m.
trburrows said...

the reason we went to war in iraq is colin powell said they had wmd to the united nations of the world and everyone in the world believed him da

February 27, 2011 at 7:33 p.m.
SavartiTN said...

Francis wrote:

  • "you're a democrat party bootlicker like bennett."

Personally, I'd rather be a Democratic bootlicker than a Republican a##kisser.

February 27, 2011 at 7:40 p.m.
Francis said...

i guess if obama sent troups to libya to stop the slaughter and atrocities commited by it's thug dictator that it would be ok with you libs, huh? as long as democrat president is in charge it's just fine. iraq wrong, libya iraq..we had the aproval of the u.n.

lyndon johnson escalated the war in vietnam as the election approached in 1964 so as to not come across as a whimp compared to barry goldwater.....

amazing how fox news is completely outnumbered by cnn, nbc, cbs, abc, pbs, msnbc and a host of others, not to mention print media....but they're influence is evil..and all the others are right on the mark.

bret, you're dillusional...the biggest tea party rally of all took place on nov. 2nd 2010..and obama was stopped can scream, have a tantrum..whatever..but let's see if all this crybaby nonsense does anything for the democrat party.....the democrat party is now the tantrum/run and hide party..

ethics, responsibilty and accountability.......?? and you're attaching this to the obama administration? if it's about that...then the liberal government and obama fail miserably.

i think the ship sailed on all that for the democrats...ethics, responsibility and accountability went out the door when obama and the liberals took over the government....

what does it matter to you what fox news reports, doesn't report or screws up?...i couldn't care less what cnn, nbc, abc, cbs and the like say.....i don't believe what any of them say unless i find out for myself....

February 27, 2011 at 7:50 p.m.
Francis said...

you libs spend way, way too much time trying discredit or silence oppossing voices......that's why you love bennett's illustrated, inane democrat party talking points. what do want, fox news to go away?...want limbuagh, hannity, levin...all gone? you want all liberal dominated media all the time? you're cowards then. if you're going to win in the arena of ideas, why bitch about what they say? let them t alk. your arguments should win, right? the problem is liberals do dominate the media, they dominate hollywood and print.....and you still lost on nob. 2nd.

you libs apparently have a problem with free speech and anyone who doesn't agree with you. i know i'm right..i couldn't care less what cnn says..or even what fox opinion is not shaped by tv networks.

February 27, 2011 at 8:04 p.m.
dude_abides said...

Colin Powell sent us to war? HA! They burnt him and left him twisting. That's what fascist pigs do, they get a token minority (like Steele) and use them as a shield. Dirty mean murderers making a mockery of conservative Christians, because they'll never admit they're wrong and change their vote. They've got you in their pocket Burrows!

February 27, 2011 at 8:08 p.m.
hambone said...

Funny how Francis says he never watches Fox, doesn't have cable or a dish. But he can name all the Fox talking heads and what they say.

What a phoney you are Francis.

February 27, 2011 at 8:27 p.m.
lkeithlu said...

"bret, you're dillusional...the biggest tea party rally of all took place on nov. 2nd 2010..and obama was stopped cold..."

The tea party was instrumental in the loss of several republican seats by electing whack jobs easily defeated by democrats.

February 27, 2011 at 8:42 p.m.

The francis character's cranky conservatism is plausible at first, but he's just serving them up for too perfectly for Clay's fans. I still ain't buying.

February 27, 2011 at 8:44 p.m.
trburrows said...

dude, if you dont remember what colin powell said and done, then go back and stick your head back up it again and leave it there.

February 27, 2011 at 8:45 p.m.
canarysong said...


Thanks for mentioning the nation-wide rallies supporting the Wisconsin labor protests. Yesterday I listened to a 60 minute podcast by 'Democracy Now!' that was primarily devoted to covering the events in Madison. Crowds there had been swelling to estimates of up to 80,000 at some points. Protesters include not only teachers, but students, parents, nurses, policemen, and many others. Although firefighters were not included in the proposed legislation and most of them voted for the governor, their union decided to support the teachers. A small city of sorts has formed in and around the capital building, with donations of supplies pouring in, enabling protesters to remain around the clock. Food donations have come in from as far away as CAIRO!

Wisconsin has a long history of progressivism, and Gov. Walker's actions are not going over very well even with many of the republicans who voted for him. A poll taken in Wisconsin just prior to the dispute showed an overwhelming majority of voters supporting the rights of public sector employees to engage in collective bargaining.

This podcast was from Friday, Feb. 25th (Democracy Now!). I have an app, but it must be available online. It's worth a listen even for those who might disagree with the teachers' union.

February 27, 2011 at 9 p.m.
dude_abides said...

burrows... I was begging his televised image not to do what he was about to do. He would have been a republican I could have for. I lost respect for him when he became their lackey. How can you defend that bunch of pigs with a straight face? If you are not ashamed of that circus you are beyond reach, but that would fit with the grotesque, base imagery you concoct.

February 27, 2011 at 9:26 p.m.
hotdiggity said...

Some of the posters here make a big deal about polls showing bias of the different stations, either liberal or conservative.

I would assume that they understand the difference between bias and deliberate distortion, fabrication, and outright lies.

February 27, 2011 at 9:31 p.m.
trburrows said...

dude, yea like you were the only one on this planet that didnt believe there was wmd. hey hindsight/monday morning qb is soooo easy, aint it. im not the fool, you people who say you knew it before it happened are the morons and fools.

February 27, 2011 at 9:33 p.m.
blackwater48 said...

Hotdiggity, when you say things like, "I would assume that they understand the difference between bias and deliberate distortion, fabrication, and outright lies," most people understand you, but other people are rolling their eyes because you're showing off your vocabulary. Trying to sound smart. Looking down their nose at people who celebrate ignorance and demonize intelligence.

They'll get this: There is a difference between lying and telling the truth.

February 27, 2011 at 9:37 p.m.

hotdiggity said...

"I would assume that they understand the difference between bias and deliberate distortion, fabrication, and outright lies."

Let me guess. Liberal distortions are not deliberate or dishonest.

February 27, 2011 at 9:39 p.m.
dude_abides said...

burrows...Kay and Blix were telling the world beforehand, and almost everyone was saying give the inspectors more time. The same thing Bush was saying after he couldn't find even a trace of powder or ANYthing! All of a sudden, he understood the meaning of patience. We were a laughing stock. W has left the building and you're still drinking the Koolaid...amazing.

February 27, 2011 at 9:49 p.m.
SeaSmokie59er said...

Fox is a GOP mouthpiece, MSNBC is a liberal mouthpiece, Clay is Francis! It's all about ratings. Get over it!

February 27, 2011 at 10:12 p.m.
trburrows said...

dude, you must have been born around 95 because you dont know nothing about the gulf war, pre and aft.

February 27, 2011 at 10:31 p.m.
dude_abides said...

Oh, you've already revised the history and I missed it? Where did they find the WMDs? I feel so stupid. Are you disputing that the inspectors asked for more time? Could you be more vague? Or... you don't know nothing neither!

February 27, 2011 at 10:59 p.m.

Coming from Europe, I was totally stunned when I first watched FOX news. I could not believe that a channel that biased exists in a non-totalitarian state.

At least for me it was definitely impossible to watch longer than 10 minutes without getting head ache. Unfortunately in Alabama one is forced to in many places like car-dealers etc.

I want to complete the list of FOX-"mistakes" with some I witnessed in some of the unfortunate cases I had to watch the GOP-Propaganda channel.

  1. When Obama took on the republicans in a "one-against-all" discussions, FOX simply pulled out of the coverage because Obama smashed the GOP arguments...

  2. Talking about the cash-for-clunkers project a FOX-reporter reported that in Minnesota only 2 !!!! applications got accepted. In fact 2 PERCENT of applications got granted. The difference is a factor of 1000, which however does not seem of any importance for this channel

  3. Shortly after the Virginia-Tech shooting FOX reported that the shooter was: an Asian exchange student, who got the gun illegally, and was probably linked to a terror-organization...

In fact, as so many he might have watched too much FOX news, which can cause severe brain-damage.... l

February 28, 2011 at 4:37 a.m.
acerigger said...

Check out,then bring your idiotic defense of Faux Newz back here.

February 28, 2011 at 7:19 a.m.
fairmon said...


You make some good points but how do you correlate being liberal to intelligence? Canarysong makes an excellent point that those participating in the democratic process should be required to have some understanding of the system and how it works. It appears to me there is a pretty good distribution of radicals and extremist among all parties and groups. If the polls are correct the welfare and dependent group which is dominated by those less educated favor democrats and liberal government while the radical gun toting but religious which also has a healthy number of the less educated favor radically conservative government. There are some very intelligent well educated liberals. The same is true among conservatives and those not committed to either party. Seems to balance out however the power may be with those willing to vote a mixed ticket based on the candidate instead of the party. Notice how so many quickly conclude those believing different than they do must be ill informed and ignorant. It is not unlike those denominations that think their religion is the only way and only those agreeing and joining them will go to heaven. Media people are interested in ratings and advertising dollars, it is naive to think most journalist are seeking facts and the truth when their personal goal is to advance and secure their own career.

February 28, 2011 at 7:49 a.m.
delmar said...

I would like to say this about the Iraq war,,, I love Frenchfries.

February 28, 2011 at 8:07 a.m.


my experience is that intelligence and being conservative can only be kept together by thorough religious brainwashing.

Expressed differently, not all of the good students were liberals, but ALL of the bad students were conservative....

February 28, 2011 at 8:20 a.m.
Musicman375 said...


my experience is that intelligence and being conservative can only be kept together by thorough religious brainwashing.

Expressed differently, not all of the good students were liberals, but ALL of the bad students were conservative.... "

austrian_in_alabama, it must be a sad life to be so closed minded, and to think that such a blanket statement can be true.

February 28, 2011 at 9:45 a.m.


sorry for you, but I was just reporting facts.

The liberals were never bad students, in none of my math-classes.

I give you an explanation: Those who freed themselves from their conservative upbringing, could only manage it with a least amount of intelligence..

but as I said, I had good students who were very conservative

February 28, 2011 at 9:59 a.m.
Musicman375 said...

Facts based on your obviously biased view and conjured memory? Did you take notes throughout your career and are now able to back up your claim with statistical data?

austrian_in_alabama, you cannot honestly say there has never been a bad, liberal student. I'm simply pointing out the fact that this simply cannot be true. Blanket statements are often wrong, and this is true for yours.

February 28, 2011 at 10:35 a.m.
pmcauley said...

Francis: Us libs have nothing against free speech, just stupidity.

I'm going to make a broad statement: conservatives are not less intelligent (as a rule, exceptions are abundant), just intellectually lazy. Listen, think, speak--- two of the previous are lacking sometimes.


February 28, 2011 at 11:03 a.m.
blackwater48 said...

Musicman said, "Did you take notes throughout your career and are now able to back up your claim with statistical data?"

It's not worth AIA's effort to provide you with 'statistical data.' You once questioned my reference to poll numbers supporting universal health care. I cited a poll conducted by Wall Street Journal/Gallop, provided a link so you could see for yourself how the questions were worded, and you dismissed the findings as liberal propaganda.

By the way, Mr. Music, I don't remember you ever citing statistical data to support your opinions.

February 28, 2011 at 11:03 a.m.
lkeithlu said...

Intelligence is not attributed to either conservatives or liberals exclusively, and I have known intelligent people from both sides. Exposure to ideas that are different and comfort with ambiguity seem more likely to determine whether someone self-identifies as conservative or liberal. I disagree that education "makes" one liberal. Those that are liberal may pursue certain areas of study or prefer certain careers, though.

Americans tend to be exposed less to ideas and cultures that are different from their own, in part because we are a large nation physically isolated from the rest of the world. Europeans move in and out of cultures easily because they must. In order to expose ourselves to different cultures we must travel pretty far. Religious background may also influence how we view the rest of the world, but I've seen people brought up as conservative fundamentalists who accept the differences of others with no problem. They are rare to be sure, but it happens.

February 28, 2011 at 11:16 a.m.

the problem with american education is that it is mainly based one "learning by heart" and "repeating" things which are taught. More in the form of a "bible-verse-memory-contest".

I do not consider this as real education. Real education shows in the ability to thoroughly weighing arguments and unbiased thinking. It really shows in the ability to solve a (math) problem by sheer thinking.

Sorry to say that, but religious conservatives deeply lack this ability...

this is an observed fact....

February 28, 2011 at 11:48 a.m.
potcat said...


February 28, 2011 at 12:36 p.m.
Musicman375 said...

bw, get over yourself. I don't HAVE to post any links on this site. As I have stated before, much of what I post on this site is done from work whenever I have a free moment (like now, while on my lunch break), with very limited internet access. The few times I've gone deep enough into a topic to post sources, I have waited until later at night when I can navigate to other sites to be able to post the links.

As for my question about AIA's source, it was a rhetorical question. I know he/she was making a point based on his/her observations in the past. I think you knew that.

Further, what I have stated still holds true; there is no possible way on this planet that there has never been a bad, liberal student.

Now, as for AIA's comment at 11:48, I agree completely with what you said about the style of education in the US. lkeithlu and many others on here can attest to the fact that I have posted that very argument many times on this site. (you might be able to sift through my previous posts if the TFP has that feature up and working again.) I am a religious conservative and have that ability, so again, I say you are wrong.

"this is an observed fact...." Say that all you want, but it shows me you must not have observed very many religious conservatives like myself.

February 28, 2011 at 12:52 p.m.
potcat said...

What the hell has happened to this web site? The above post just appeared and can't edit. Anyway bigridge this charater is here to stay! I have burned out on a lot of things in life and am a better person for doing so .But this is a piece of cake and i am not going any where. I take that back feels like my house is going to blow away any second now.big you caling me angry is hillarious! You need to take agood look at your postings. Not only are you DELUSIONAL but a very ANGRY THING!

February 28, 2011 at 12:59 p.m.
lkeithlu said...

I can vouch for that, Musicman, and I agree that eduction by rote is not really learning. However, I agree with you (and disagree with AIA) that you cannot make blanket statements about groups of people. (it's called "stereotyping, remember?) I am as liberal as they come, but do not fit ANY liberal stereotypes. I do have a laugh with my very conservative cousins from time to time about letting go of my welfare collecting, drug and alcohol soaked lifestyle full of babies from multiple fathers.

February 28, 2011 at 1:14 p.m.
alprova said...

You can edit your posts for fifteen minutes after you first post them. After that, they are permanent.

February 28, 2011 at 1:18 p.m.
blackwater48 said...

Musicman said, "Further, what I have stated still holds true; there is no possible way on this planet that there has never been a bad, liberal student."

The Austrian didn't say that. You made a giant leap to that conclusion, but your repudiation only reinforced the observation. AIA said, "The liberals were never bad students, in none of my math-classes...."but... I had good students who were very conservative."

As for education, which political party is more likely to cut art, music, gym, and extra curricular activities?

February 28, 2011 at 1:59 p.m.
potcat said...

The Free Press editorial side has mediocre cartoonist that can't come close to the creativity in satire and sketching that Clay Bennets Talent entertains us with weekly.Its obvious the intelligence..truthfullness..Humane left side of the papper is just more!

February 28, 2011 at 2:06 p.m.


it is easy to find out in a class who is liberal, in particular in Alabama. You just have to ask the right questions or make some comments.

I was saying two things: First, those who outed themselves as liberal were always pretty decent students. (You might argue that the bad liberals did not dare to out themselves.. Thats true, but I doubt that). On the other hand I also had very good conservative students.

But, among graduate students, who were home-schooled for religious reasons, I saw severe limitations in the ability of thinking freely, which hindered them to make a career in Math. This are observations which were also observed by other colleagues..

February 28, 2011 at 2:09 p.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

I cannot believe bennett gets paid for what he does. Yawn! Every day he disappoints. Thank goodness for the comment section or there would be nothing to come here for.

Maybe even potcat will figure out how to make a meaningful contriblution one day.

February 28, 2011 at 2:18 p.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

For anyone hungry for a decent cartoon…

Go Scott Walker!

February 28, 2011 at 2:23 p.m.
canarysong said...

austrian _in_alabama;

I can't tell you how glad I am that you're here; I hope you stick around. Did you bring along a thick skin? You're going to need it. I expected to see bits of flesh, hair, and blood lying around here after your 'religious brainwashing' comment. I experienced a similar culture shock upon coming to this country; I've never fully adjusted. Religious fundamentalists in this country do not understand that nearly all of the rest of the western world views them as extremists. While everyone is entitled to their own personal belief system, understanding how that is viewed from the outside and having a respectful understanding of the beliefs of others can be nothing but beneficial to relationships, both interpersonal and between nations.

I think Ikeithlu made some very good points in her 11:16 post; anyone that may have skimmed over that should read it carefully.

There is a lot of information out there for anyone hoping to quantify the relationship between IQ and political affiliation, BUT.....from my (long ago) background in social science research I can tell you that there are many pitfalls. There are a lot of 'junk' IQ tests and a lot of 'junk' research studies. The only way to determine whether there is value in a study is to first have an understanding of proper research methods, and then to look into whether those methods were followed. Not only can improper design (sample that is too small or demographically unrepresentative) render a study worthless, but bias may taint the results by the way that questions are framed or even by the demeanor of the examiner. The basic rule applies - 'correlation does not imply causation'. This is important to remember because there are MANY factors that interact within human systems, both within a society and even within an individual. It is virtually impossible to keep all of them in account. Correlation can, however, point us in directions that may be worthy of further study. In an age when so much information is available we must become smart consumers, not only of products, but of information as well.

With those caveats in mind, here is something that recently crossed my path:

This from a 2008 poll by the Washington Post: In the 2008 presidential election, the support for the leading candidates broke down as follows: white voters with no college degree - McCain led by 17 points white voters with college degrees - Obama led by 9 points

February 28, 2011 at 2:36 p.m.
delmar said...

Can't we all just get along?

Libertarians4Freedom said... "why can't we have liberal and conservative cartoons instead"

Actually, in my humble opinion, this ain't a bad idea.

February 28, 2011 at 2:38 p.m.
canarysong said...


And something that crossed my thoughts after reading someone else's observations:

Conservatives in this country seem to fall into several distinct groups, with significant differences between them. Please forgive me for generalizing, which ALWAYS has its limitations and exceptions.

--The financial elite, those who run corporations, and those who own businesses. The best of these are financially savvy and truly believe that an unfettered free market system is the best path for the nation's well-being. Those that represent the worst of this group put profits above all, using any means available to maximize them.

--The foreign policy hawks and those who worry a lot about homeland security. One might also include in this group those who strongly oppose gun control legislation. Most military personnel and law enforcement are likely to fall into this group as well.

--Those whose lives (including their voting choices) are strongly directed by their religion. They are more likely than most to vote according to a candidate's perceived 'character', faith, and their stand on 'morality' issues such as abortion and gay rights.

--Those for whom the world simply seems to be moving much too fast. Technological and/or social changes intimidate them and threaten their basic feeling of 'place' in the world and they long for a return to an idyllic time past that may exist only in their imagination.

While many of us have observed what seems to be a disproportionate number of dufuses (a professional term used among social psychologists:-) among the tea party ranks, it's certainly unfair to say that all conservatives are stupid. We can see plenty of examples of wise and foolish, smart and stupid, virtuous and evil, within any ideological group.

Please remember, guys, that Austrian in AL was merely offering a personal opinion based admittedly on personal experience. Anecdotal evidence is not completely worthless; we just need to keep in mind that it has serious limitations.

February 28, 2011 at 2:46 p.m.
lkeithlu said...

TFP does publish cartoonists from both sides, but may not be able to publish their conservative cartoonists on their web page (Clay works for the TFP) In the print issue the right side of the editorial page prints a cartoon in the upper corner. They do something kind of odd, though. They print a title above the cartoon. (the cartoonist does not apparently title the cartoon). Not sure why they do this.

February 28, 2011 at 2:47 p.m.
mountainlaurel said...

Libertarians4freedom said: "I'm sick and tired of this stupid liberal cartoonist."

Goodness, L4F! A “libertarian” who complains about freedom of speech? You don’t sound like any liberterian that I know. You must be one of those hybrid right wing corporatist oligarch libertarian types – the kind that likes to dictate and doesn't believe in freedom of speech for public workers, the middle-class, and liberal cartoonists.

February 28, 2011 at 2:48 p.m.


I have to disappoint you!!

After five years living in a conservative neighborhood in Alabama, I took a professor-position in Germany. I did not bear living in this "intellectual jungle" any longer.

But, I still follow american politics and I very much enjoyed Clay's cartoons. I had several of those on my office-door.

I really suffered a lot in particular seeing how much the people hate Obama for no good reason. But, if I would go on now, I could not stop writing..

BUT, I will stay along to post comments, in particular since I realized how much the world diffes between Germany and Alamaba.

I dont say everything is pert here!! But, people from different parties, religions, etc, can come together (and do that regularly on TV) and lead a civil discourse with exchanging reasonable options and agreeing on big parts, things totally impossible..

AND, student coming to university are much better educated than in Alabama.

I think the main reason is that being teacher is a well respected job and quite well paid..

February 28, 2011 at 3:01 p.m.
mountainlaurel said...

ITGuy said: "Their lies are either due to incompetence or they are deliberate. In either case, they are inexcusable. Their track record is far worse than any other news outlet, and they do not admit their mistakes. The FCC should revoke their license."

I agree with what you say, ITGuy. As I understand it, stations are suppose to serve in the Public’s Interest, which is the opposite of what the Fox Channel does. It also seems to me that it would be rather easy to prove to the FCC that the Fox Channel is mostly about non-factual “news” with a malicious intent to deceive the public.

February 28, 2011 at 3:33 p.m.
delmar said...

I was just thinking, (I know, I know, and no it didn't hurt,,, much) maybe somebody has said this before, but is there a liberal equivalent to Francis or indian that posts here? I don't recall seeing any posts like that. Just sayin'.

February 28, 2011 at 4:49 p.m.
fairmon said...

Those believing they are thinking logically and posting here may not agree that thinking can be lateral. When AIA found where he was to be unacceptable to him he headed back to that place from whence he came. And as he knows some have left that place and prefer the U.S. The decision either by either indicates intelligence or ignorance.

I have never seen a scientifically sound study that would correlate one's ideals or political convictions with intelligence. Would it be accurate to conclude that Dwight Eisenhower was not intelligent but Harry Truman was? I don't consider William Buckley to be lacking in intelligence but I don't agree with a lot of his philosophy and opinions. I don't think Bill Marher (sp) lacks intelligence but I think he is an egotistical smart ass in the same class with Bill O'Riley (sp). It is not good when one concludes they think on a higher level and do better research, have a better in sight, know better how people think, thinking they can detect bias and errors better than anyone in information sources. Some get angry and go on the attack and post all kinds of data and sources that convince them they are right. Is it possible some people look for re-enforcement for what they have already concluded.

February 28, 2011 at 4:54 p.m.
blackwater48 said...

Delmar wondered, "is there a liberal equivalent to Francis or indian that posts here?"

No, and the reason is self-evident.

Harp asked, "Would it be accurate to conclude that Dwight Eisenhower was not intelligent but Harry Truman was? "

Of course not, but politics have gone off the right wing deep end lately. Eisenhower warned against the 'military industrial complex,' initiated a massive outlay of tax payer dollars - some called it a stimulus bill - to begin construction of the Interstate Highway System, and fully supported workers' rights to bargain collectively. A flaming liberal by today's measure.

If I listed some of Reagan's accomplishments he wouldn't fit in the tea bag either.

February 28, 2011 at 5:04 p.m.
lkeithlu said...

" I am offended by the political bias of this newspaper, by the fact that they ONLY have liberal cartoons."

If you received the print version you would see that the paper is quite balanced. Of course, you have to pay for it. This is a free website. If you don't like it don't come here.

Delmar wondered, "is there a liberal equivalent to Francis or indian that posts here?"

Actually, there has been. FM33 comes to mind. He was quite annoying, making multiple posts that linked You-tube videos. He may have been banned but I'm not sure.

February 28, 2011 at 5:47 p.m.
canarysong said...


I hope you saw that my post earlier today was aimed at warning against putting too much trust into studies that attempt to draw conclusions about the relationship between IQ and political affiliation. We can pretty easily look at educational level and voting behavior, but there are some extraneous factors at play there as well.

One reason I wanted to explore the issue of different types of voters lumped under the umbrella of conservatism is that I was hoping to get your take on this. I obviously see you falling into that first group (NOT the profits at any cost type) that I mentioned. Any thoughts?

I love Bill Maher and yesterday jokingly referred to him as a "great American philosopher". However, he is a comedian and his role is to entertain. I'm pretty sure he would be the first to admit that he is a huge smart ass. Unlike Bill O'Reilly, he does not claim to be unbiased and does not present himself in the role of a journalist.

February 28, 2011 at 6:19 p.m.
canarysong said...

On the topic of humor...

Check out MTJohn's avatar more closely by finding it on the last cartoon and clicking the thumbnail version which will take you to his page.......LMAO!

February 28, 2011 at 7:12 p.m. the new layout for the site it kicks so much butt and everybody looks great and at last AVATAR land is here.

Clay thanks a million pal.

February 28, 2011 at 7:38 p.m.
blackwater48 said...


"I won't insult your intelligence by suggesting that you really believe what you just said."

"Even if one takes every reefer madness allegation of the prohibitionists at face value, marijuana prohibition has done far more harm to far more people than marijuana ever could."

"I would like to take you seriously, but to do so would affront your intelligence."

February 28, 2011 at 8:06 p.m.
ITguy said...

I was wondering how long my post correlating education with liberal philosophy would go unchallenged. The only supporting research that I know of is the study that Canary mentioned.

Obviously there are very intelligent conservatives who are well educated. William Buckley comes to mind, and Harp seems to be pretty intelligent. I have friends who are conservative and who are well educated. I have no problem with the conservative philosophy. What I have a problem with is people who are intellectually dishonest, or who base their opinions of ignorance and refuse to accept any evidence that fails to support their opinions.

At the end of the day, we should all be seekers of truth. If the truth leads you to an unexpected destination, how is that a bad thing? If you are unwilling to change when presented with new evidence, then you might as well lie down and die.

February 28, 2011 at 8:34 p.m.
canarysong said...


Well said.

February 28, 2011 at 8:50 p.m.
mountainlaurel said...

Libertarian4freedom said: “libertarians support capitalism which means supporting corporations and "oligarchs" who create far more jobs etc.”

But what good is a job when oligarchs expect workers to do the job for nothing? If you doubt this, just ask the workers in China. They've learned all about American oligarchs, which is why there has been some problems like strikes, suicides, and civil unrest.

February 28, 2011 at 9:09 p.m.
mountainlaurel said...

A little humor from one of my favorite bloggers - Mark Kleiman:

“David Koch is sitting at a table with a schoolteacher and a Tea Party activist. On the table is a plate with a dozen cookies. The billionaire promptly scoops up 11 of the cookies. He then turns to the tea partier and says, “Watch out for that schoolteacher. He’s in a union, and he wants a piece of your cookie.” [In A Nutshell – Mark Kleiman]

February 28, 2011 at 9:52 p.m.
canarysong said...

OK, one tidbit to finish off the topic of Clay's cartoon, some of you probably have already seen this;

A new survey of American voters shows that Fox News viewers are significantly more misinformed than consumers of news from other sources.

"Yet another study has been released proving that watching Fox News is detrimental to your intelligence. World Public Opinion, a project managed by the Program on International Policy Attitudes at the University of Maryland, conducted a survey of American voters that shows that Fox News viewers are significantly more misinformed than consumers of news from other sources. What’s more, the study shows that greater exposure to Fox News increases misinformation."

"So the more you watch, the less you know. Or to be precise, the more you think you know that is actually false. This study corroborates a previous PIPA study that focused on the Iraq war with similar results. And there was an NBC/Wall Street Journal poll that demonstrated the break with reality on the part of Fox viewers with regard to health care. The body of evidence that Fox News is nothing but a propaganda machine dedicated to lies is growing by the day."

"The conclusion is inescapable. Fox News is deliberately misinforming its viewers and it is doing so for a reason. Every issue above is one in which the Republican Party had a vested interest. The GOP benefited from the ignorance that Fox News helped to proliferate. The results were apparent in the election last month as voters based their decisions on demonstrably false information fed to them by Fox News."

"By the way, the rest of the media was not blameless. CNN and the broadcast network news operations fared only slightly better in many cases. Even MSNBC, which had the best record of accurately informing viewers, has a ways to go before it can brag about it."

February 28, 2011 at 10:11 p.m.
acerigger said...

canarysong, thanks for that (10:11 post). I had read that,even bookmarked it for later, but haven't had time to find and post it.

February 28, 2011 at 11:03 p.m.
fairmon said...

The posting here is proof that when a person is asked how they go about judging and reaching conclusions about how other people think and act, what do you use as a comparator? they will philosophy and describe their thinking at length which essentially says I think they should "think and act just like me". They are quick to conclude those doing otherwise are ignorant or have bad information.

Don't you love those that say "I just tell it like it is" which is actually "telling it the way that think it is or should be". Or those that say I just call it like I see it. That would be fine if not for their scotomas. We all have them but few realize it.

March 1, 2011 at 12:58 a.m.
canarysong said...


Seriously.......One of the main reasons that I outlined my thoughts on conservative voters was that I was eager to see what you thought. You would seem to have a more intimate perspective on it than I do. I like reading what you think.

I will check back here tomorrow.

March 1, 2011 at 2:45 a.m.

There are definite studies that being very religious (which is quite equivalent to conservative in the South) correlates negative with intelligence. Too much Jesus damages your brain...

Just look at Bill O'Reilly who explains the existence of god with the tides!!! I am always wondering how such statements can go unchallenged in the US. In Europe he would be sacked immediately for incompetence... But among conservatives the scientific standard is on the level of the dark middle ages ...

March 1, 2011 at 3:39 a.m.
canarysong said...


I'm happy to see you back. There are only a few of us here who have been willing to speak up about the irrationality and dangers of religious fundamentalism. With the uproar that it usually causes, it's no wonder that most rational people stay silent on the matter. In this country, religion is exempt from scrutiny.....except Islam. But as I have argued before, when religion attempts to influence public policy decisions on issues like education, stem cell research, and foreign policy then its adherents should not balk at a frank discussion of their faith.

To see an extreme example of clinging to fantasy in the face of scientific evidence, just look up the Creationist Museum in Kentucky. It touts itself as 'educational'. You may laugh at the absurdity or you may cry over the demise of intellectual integrity in this country. It would seem relatively harmless were it not for the attempts to undermine science education in the schools. While religious fundamentalists are free to believe whatever they want, when they try to teach fairy tales (disguised as science) in public school to my children with my tax money, I object.

When the mysteries of nature are simply explained by 'god', what happens to our drive to learn, to understand? When 'god has a reason for everything' what happens to our motivation to right the wrongs of the world? If we are just waiting for the 'rapture', might some people support policies that would hasten its arrival?

March 1, 2011 at 10:36 a.m.

totally agree..

I found the believe in Adam and Eve funny until the moment one student told me that "global warming" is no problem, since after we used up all fossil fuels God will send us the messiah back saving those who believe in him...

March 1, 2011 at 11:41 a.m.
lkeithlu said...

Indeed: my litmus test for a candidate is whether they accept modern evolutionary theory. If they insist on biblical creation, they are out, because my mind if they adhere to a myth in the face of overwhelming evidence from the natural world, how can they govern effectively in the 21st century?

If they insist on "teach the controversy" and Intelligent Design in public schools, then that's evidence that they refuse to listen to scientists and science educators and instead accept hucksters and religious zealots' words on the matter. Also an indication that they can't govern effectively.

March 1, 2011 at 12:16 p.m.

Bill Maher. Intelligent? (chuckle)

March 1, 2011 at 1:39 p.m.
canarysong said...

"Reason has built the modern world. It is a precious but also a fragile thing, which can be corroded by apparently harmless irrationality. We must favor verifiable evidence over private feeling. Otherwise we leave ourselves vulnerable to those who would obscure the truth."

Richard Dawkins, 'The Enemies of Reason', 2007

March 1, 2011 at 1:45 p.m.

harp3339 said...

"The posting here is proof that when a person is asked how they go about judging and reaching conclusions about how other people think and act, what do you use as a comparator? they will philosophy and describe their thinking at length which essentially says I think they should "think and act just like me". They are quick to conclude those doing otherwise are ignorant or have bad information.

"Don't you love those that say "I just tell it like it is" which is actually "telling it the way that think it is or should be". Or those that say I just call it like I see it. That would be fine if not for their scotomas. We all have them but few realize it."

Well put. So sorry I missed all the self-congratulation over how intelligent everyone considers themselves and people who agree with them to be.

Rationality vs. Bill Maher's superstition

"Look Who's Irrational Now"

March 1, 2011 at 2:09 p.m.


I guess you consider Sean Hannity, Glenn Beck, Rush Limbough and Bill - nobody-can-explain-tides-O'Reilly as your intellectual guides...

... at least it seems so according to your twisted logic ...

March 1, 2011 at 2:32 p.m.
canarysong said...


I see you've met another one of the trolls that live under our bridge. There are many things about the world that don't reach them there. One apparently is the fact that Bill Maher is a COMEDIAN.

I hope you have better luck trying to actually get one of them to hear what you are trying to say than I have had. Personally, I've decided it's a giant waste of my time.

March 1, 2011 at 3:28 p.m.


I surrendered long ago.. how can you ever argue with creationists ..

the agent selling my house last June told me her 401K, and the Stock marked in general, got hit due to Obama's policies...

In such moments I usually shook heads, retrieved and watched my all time hero- George Carlin

March 1, 2011 at 4:10 p.m.
canarysong said...

It's a sad commentary that our comedians, George Carlin, John Stewart, Bill Maher, provide us with a little respite from the insanity that surrounds us!

March 1, 2011 at 4:34 p.m.

Bill Maher is a COMEDIAN who makes sweeping, bigoted statements about fellow citizens with whom he disagrees. He shares that trait with many of our posters. When you run out of good arguments, ad hominem seems to be the order of the day. How sad.

From the article:

"...According to prominent atheists like Richard Dawkins, traditional religious belief is "dangerously irrational." From Hollywood to the academy, nonbelievers are convinced that a decline in traditional religious belief would lead to a smarter, more scientifically literate and even more civilized populace.

"The reality is that the New Atheist campaign, by discouraging religion, won't create a new group of intelligent, skeptical, enlightened beings. Far from it: It might actually encourage new levels of mass superstition. And that's not a conclusion to take on faith -- it's what the empirical data tell us.

"What Americans Really Believe," a comprehensive new study released by Baylor University yesterday, shows that traditional Christian religion greatly decreases belief in everything from the efficacy of palm readers to the usefulness of astrology. It also shows that the irreligious and the members of more liberal Protestant denominations, far from being resistant to superstition, tend to be much more likely to believe in the paranormal and in pseudoscience than evangelical Christians."

March 1, 2011 at 8:30 p.m.
lkeithlu said...

Yep, Baylor University. No bias there, and no pre-conceived notions about religion. hmmm....The bulk of the study seemed to compare small churches with mega churches. That traditional religion reduces belief in woo seems to contradict the fact that a large percent of our population believes in woo. Now, I don't have a problem with religion, until it flies in the face of reality. Even then I have no big problem, until it's used to influence how we are governed and how science is taught. Then I have a BIG problem with it. " It might actually encourage new levels of mass superstition. And that's not a conclusion to take on faith -- it's what the empirical data tell us." I'd like to see that empirical data.

March 1, 2011 at 8:42 p.m.

The empirical data consists of a survey was conducted by the Gallup organization. It was funded by the John M. Templeton Foundation

“The Baylor Survey found that traditional Christian religion greatly decreases credulity, as measured by beliefs in such things as dreams, Bigfoot, UFOs, haunted houses, communicating with the dead and astrology. Still, it remains widely believed that religious people are especially credulous, particularly those who identify themselves as Evangelicals, born again, Bible believers and fundamentalists. However, the ISR researchers found that conservative religious Americans are far less likely to believe in the occult and paranormal than are other Americans, with self-identified theological liberals and the irreligious far more likely than other Americans to believe. The researchers say this shows that it is not religion in general that suppresses such beliefs, but conservative religion.”

March 1, 2011 at 9:12 p.m.
lkeithlu said...

A search of Gallup's website results in no such study.

March 1, 2011 at 9:49 p.m.
lkeithlu said...

Gallup did have an earlier study, but the results do not match your post. People for whom religion was important tended to believe ESP and other paranormal phenomenon more than non-religious. (not in all categories-some were relatively the same)

March 1, 2011 at 10 p.m.

Yeah. In the 2001 survey, the non-religious believed in extraterrestrials and telepathy more than religious folks, but that one was earlier. They conduct these polls every couple of years. I can't find the one cited in the Baylor report online. It was, however, published in the Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion (Volume 46, Issue 4, pages 447–463, December 2007). You could probably get it through a college library.

March 1, 2011 at 10:51 p.m.
delmar said...

What is "very religious"?

March 2, 2011 at 6:30 a.m.
lkeithlu said...

"Yeah. In the 2001 survey, the non-religious believed in extraterrestrials and telepathy more than religious folks, but that one was earlier."

But the religious believed in the paranormal, demons and other supernatural things. Like I said, the 2001 study was inconclusive. The later study was not done by Gallup but by Baylor. I did see the four studies you mentioned, and already knew about those. The very religious also have higher rates of teen pregnancy.

I was never arguing against the positives of religion. But religion has its negatives too, and it is not essential for a good, rich and meaningful life. Neither is belief in a god or any other supernatural beings. Non-belief in a god does not correlate with belief in other woo. I know many people that a) don't go to church and b) believe in god AND lots of other stuff. Most of my atheist friends and myself included accept none of it.

March 2, 2011 at 6:43 a.m.
please login to post a comment

videos »         

photos »         

e-edition »


Find a Business

400 East 11th St., Chattanooga, TN 37403
General Information (423) 756-6900
Copyright, Permissions, Terms & Conditions, Privacy Policy, Ethics policy - Copyright ©2014, Chattanooga Publishing Company, Inc. All rights reserved.
This document may not be reprinted without the express written permission of Chattanooga Publishing Company, Inc.