if I may...one would presume that the readership of the Times Free Press could identify political practioners and elected official such as; Al Gore (former Vice President of the United States), Bob Corker (current Senator from Tennessee) , Jim Sasser (former Senator from Tennessee) and Lamar Alexander (current Senator from Tennessee). I don't think the same presumption can be made by SandyonSignal (office holder of the local, perhaps state, Democrat Party) despite her belief that she is well known...that would be,well, presumptuous.
Sandy, you seem to take exception to quite a bit and you are begging the question which is not the competency of our wonderful police force but rather your overwrought response (see Sandys response above). Moreover, I don't know of a single one of our kind and generous residents who would knowingly "slander" our Police Force or act in a "villianous" fashion toward them (or anyone else). I also don't know of anyone on the Mountain who is as willing to adopt a tone more appropriate in Washinton DC than in a small and loving town (caustic indeed). I'm not sure (as you seem to be) that everyone on the Mtn. knows where one police jurisdiction ends and the other begins while on East Brow road. Pity the person who innocently asks you for directions.
Further, I don't know what to make of someone who is willing to make such absolute statements when you are unwilling to take ownership of your own remarks.
Thank you HollyKesley for sharing your expertise. I've learned quite a bit about search and rescue in the last few days.
Perhaps if "SandyonSignal" identified him/herself more fully he or she wouldn't be quite so unpleasant when responding to neighbors regarding their observations in the comments section. Referring to a question as "stupid" (yesterdays comments on the jurisdiction of
Signal Mountain Police in the Palmgren case) reveals a feeling of superiority and lack of humility by the author. Perhaps the author has more friends than she knows what to do with and can afford ill-placed, biting comments, but I doubt it.
Final Note on the survey regarding Fox News Viewers. The Fairleigh Dickenson survey was commissioned by WDFU-FM radio which is the University owned, non-commercial, station (operating from 1:15 to 3:45 weekdays). It all sounded very legitimate until I tried to speak with the contact person listed on the survey press release and all he would say was "everything I wanted to know was on the website" which certainly is not the case. I would liked to have asked a question but he then hung up. The listed links on the website were, not surprisingly, all in support of President Obama, Elizabeth Warren (Democrat from Massachusetts)etc.
This doesn't exactly build a case for rigid objectivity required for useful survey research but rather appears to be a somewhat goofy attempt at promoting an obsure product that no one seems to want to buy (perhaps the survey has been published by someone other that the authors but I can't find it).
(As a holiday present to those people who write in the comments section, it sure would be nice if the TFP added a spell-check application. For obvious reasons, I would be most grateful)
From yesterdays comments section SandyonSignal cited a new poll (Fairleigh Dickenson University) questioning the degree to which Fox News Viewers can accuratly answer the survey instruments questions. As I read it the poll was conducted in only one state, that being New Jersey.
"Sandy on Signal" references a study she says was released last week that asserts Fox Viewers are grossly misinformed about "facts" when compared to consumers of other news outlets. If I'm not mistaken, the study (now a year old), sited by the Huffington Post and The New York Times in December 2010 was, a since debunked, product of the University of Maryland but because it has been repeated so often it has become a fact in many newsrooms and individual minds.
No less than the Atlantic Monthly (among others) took issue with the researchers analysis (although not until June of this year) and construction of the questions in the survey.
By way of an imaginary example, if you disagreed "that the world was going to end around or about next Tuesday due to man made global warming" you would be classified as misinformed.
If indeed a new study was released last week confirming, in some people's minds, that Fox News Viewers are idiots I've missed it and my apologies to "Sandy on Signal".
Leah Geraghty also on Signal
November 30, 2011 at 3:52 p.m. Strong
"Sandy on Signal" references a study released last week that asserts Fox Viewers are grossly misinformed about "facts" when compared to consumers of other news outlets. If I'm not mistaken, The study, sited by the Huffington Post and The New York Times in December 2010 was, a since debunked, product of the University of Maryland but because it has been repeated so often it has become a fact in many newsrooms and individual minds.
No less than the Atlantic Monthly (among others) took issue with the researchers analysis (although not until June of this year) and constuction of the questions in the survey.