View Full Version : pressure put on FOX
KP3FT
07-29-2007, 05:44 PM
Link (http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D8QL52780&show_article=1)
So what?
This tactic has been used for years by people with diverse points of view.
Your buddies Lou Sheldon and Donald Wildmon are prime users of this tactic. That's their right, as it is MoveOn.org's right to go in the same direction.
Spare us the "Faux News" as victims rant.
Personally, I won't patronize ANYONE who advertises on KSFO in San Francisco. Fox "News" advertisers aren't high on my list either.
Dave NX6D
Tulelake, CA
KP3FT
07-29-2007, 06:04 PM
Quote[/b] (nx6d @ July 29 2007,10:48)]So what?
This tactic has been used for years by people with diverse points of view.
Your buddies Lou Sheldon and Donald Wildmon are prime users of this tactic. That's their right, as it is MoveOn.org's right to go in the same direction.
Spare us the "Faux News" as victims rant.
Personally, I won't patronize ANYONE who advertises on KSFO in San Francisco. Fox "News" advertisers aren't high on my list either.
Dave NX6D
Tulelake, CA
Whoa, relax...must have hit a nerve there. I don't think it's right for any side to do it, and also I've never even heard of Sheldon and Wildman.
I wonder if it's even an effective tactic; from an advertiser's point of view, it seems like common sense to advertise a product in mediums of all political, sociological, etc. opinions, simply because you get more viewers. The only time I could see it being effective is if the advertiser actually loses more customers from boycotts than it gains by advertising on the offending media outlet.
w2amr
07-29-2007, 06:23 PM
Quote[/b] (nx6d @ July 29 2007,10:48)]So what?
This tactic has been used for years by people with diverse points of view.
Your buddies Lou Sheldon and Donald Wildmon are prime users of this tactic. That's their right, as it is MoveOn.org's right to go in the same direction.
Spare us the "Faux News" as victims rant.
Personally, I won't patronize ANYONE who advertises on KSFO in San Francisco. Fox "News" advertisers aren't high on my list either.
Dave NX6D
Tulelake, CA
A very popular ploy by the bible beaters over the years.
w2amr
07-29-2007, 08:09 PM
Like this.........
link (http://boycottford.com/)
Quote[/b] (KP3FT @ July 29 2007,10:04)]Quote[/b] (nx6d @ July 29 2007,10:48)]So what?
This tactic has been used for years by people with diverse points of view.
Your buddies Lou Sheldon and Donald Wildmon are prime users of this tactic. That's their right, as it is MoveOn.org's right to go in the same direction.
Spare us the "Faux News" as victims rant.
Personally, I won't patronize ANYONE who advertises on KSFO in San Francisco. Fox "News" advertisers aren't high on my list either.
Dave NX6D
Tulelake, CA
Whoa, relax...must have hit a nerve there. #I don't think it's right for any side to do it, and also I've never even heard of Sheldon and Wildman. #
I wonder if it's even an effective tactic; from an advertiser's point of view, it seems like common sense to advertise a product in mediums of all political, sociological, etc. opinions, simply because you get more viewers. #The only time I could see it being effective is if the advertiser actually loses more customers from boycotts than it gains by advertising on the offending media outlet.
You're an anti-abortion fanatic and you don't know who Lou Sheldon and Donald Wildmon are?
I find that hard to believe...
Typical for the Stalinist Left. All for free speech, so long as it's the speech they agree with. Of course they LIBS will be posting the list of conservative groups who have urged a boycott of the main stream LIB media....NOT.
w2amr
07-29-2007, 09:15 PM
Quote[/b] (nx6d @ July 29 2007,13:14)]Quote[/b] (KP3FT @ July 29 2007,10:04)]Quote[/b] (nx6d @ July 29 2007,10:48)]So what?
This tactic has been used for years by people with diverse points of view.
Your buddies Lou Sheldon and Donald Wildmon are prime users of this tactic. That's their right, as it is MoveOn.org's right to go in the same direction.
Spare us the "Faux News" as victims rant.
Personally, I won't patronize ANYONE who advertises on KSFO in San Francisco. Fox "News" advertisers aren't high on my list either.
Dave NX6D
Tulelake, CA
Whoa, relax...must have hit a nerve there. #I don't think it's right for any side to do it, and also I've never even heard of Sheldon and Wildman. #
I wonder if it's even an effective tactic; from an advertiser's point of view, it seems like common sense to advertise a product in mediums of all political, sociological, etc. opinions, simply because you get more viewers. #The only time I could see it being effective is if the advertiser actually loses more customers from boycotts than it gains by advertising on the offending media outlet.
You're an anti-abortion fanatic and you don't know who Lou Sheldon and Donald Wildmon are?
I find that hard to believe...
I think our legs are being pulled.
Quote[/b] (K3XR @ July 29 2007,16:01)]Typical for the Stalinist Left. All for free speech, so long as it's the speech they agree with.
Which is why AM talk radio screens callers and hangs up on people from an opposing view who may just have a point?
kb2vxa
07-29-2007, 10:14 PM
Who listens to radio? Only three hundred and fifty million people, that's all.
From an old PAMS spot on WABC Radio 77 New York with as much sarcasm as I can muster.
Quote[/b] (K3XR @ July 29 2007,17:01)]Typical for the Stalinist Left. All for free speech, so long as it's the speech they agree with. Of course they LIBS will be posting the list of conservative groups who have urged a boycott of the main stream LIB media....NOT.
Well, if O'Reilly and the Hitlerite Right hadn't started up about JetBlue going to the yearly KosCon, this wouldn't be happening. It's a good bet that O'Reilly will be dog catcher by this time next year. Too bad the righties lead with their jaw and get their lederhosen bunched up when people defend themselves.
n2ize
07-29-2007, 10:26 PM
Fox news is infamous for giving biased opinions. They generally present a biased, one sided, non intellectual, and invalid point of view. it's well within the rights of groups like moveon.org to express their concern to the advertizers and put pressure on them.
KP3FT
07-30-2007, 12:35 AM
Quote[/b] (nx6d @ July 29 2007,13:14)]Quote[/b] (KP3FT @ July 29 2007,10:04)]Quote[/b] (nx6d @ July 29 2007,10:48)]So what?
This tactic has been used for years by people with diverse points of view.
Your buddies Lou Sheldon and Donald Wildmon are prime users of this tactic. That's their right, as it is MoveOn.org's right to go in the same direction.
Spare us the "Faux News" as victims rant.
Personally, I won't patronize ANYONE who advertises on KSFO in San Francisco. Fox "News" advertisers aren't high on my list either.
Dave NX6D
Tulelake, CA
Whoa, relax...must have hit a nerve there. I don't think it's right for any side to do it, and also I've never even heard of Sheldon and Wildman.
I wonder if it's even an effective tactic; from an advertiser's point of view, it seems like common sense to advertise a product in mediums of all political, sociological, etc. opinions, simply because you get more viewers. The only time I could see it being effective is if the advertiser actually loses more customers from boycotts than it gains by advertising on the offending media outlet.
You're an anti-abortion fanatic and you don't know who Lou Sheldon and Donald Wildmon are?
I find that hard to believe...
Nope, never heard of them. I'll Google them later. Also, I don't watch Fox News here since I don't have cable or satellite TV.
What part of my anti-abortion stance makes me a fanatic?
k4kyv
07-30-2007, 12:48 AM
Isn't this an example of the free speech and free enterprise the USA is supposed to be all about?
Freedom to speak out and recommend to people to buy or not to buy a certain product.
Freedom to choose which business you patronise.
It's been done by all extremes of the political spectrum for as long as I can remember.
KP3FT
07-30-2007, 01:07 AM
Quote[/b] (n2ize @ July 29 2007,15:26)]Fox news is infamous for giving biased opinions. They generally present a biased, one sided, non intellectual, and invalid point of view. it's well within the rights of groups like moveon.org to express their concern to the advertizers and put pressure on them.
I agree it's within their rights, and I wouldn't presume to take those rights away, but I still don't think it's necessary to take it the level of boycotts and pressure on advertisers, with all the other news services out there that are reporting what they want.
I have a few issues of my own, but I'm not promoting boycotts to see that they are reported better, so any people (not you N2IZE, because you aren't) out there trying to pin a straw-man on me and invalidate my view by an assumed hypocritical stance on my part won't have any luck.
Also, I've seriously never heard of those two guys...I don't watch FOX, and I don't listen to talk radio either. I have in the past listened to both liberal and conservative talk radio and noticed so much bias and spin that they both turned me off. I prefer going to the most reputable sources and getting both sides of an issue before making any conclusions. Reporting of facts would be nice, without one iota of opinion, but I fear that is rare.
73 Jeff KP3FT
KP3FT
07-30-2007, 01:16 AM
Quote[/b] (k4kyv @ July 29 2007,17:48)]Isn't this an example of the free speech and free enterprise the USA is supposed to be all about?
Freedom to speak out and recommend to people to buy or not to buy a certain product.
Freedom to choose which business you patronise.
It's been done by all extremes of the political spectrum for as long as I can remember.
Yes, it's free speech, but it seems more complex than that. People (boycotters) are using their right of free speech as pressure to stop the free speech of others (FOX). If they don't like what FOX is saying within FOX's free speech rights, can't they just switch the channel to another news agency? What bothers me is that they themselves are actually trying to hinder free speech. Are that that afraid of differing opinion?
I am not calling for a stop to it; it is free speech and it is their right. All I'm saying is that I disagree with it.
73 Jeff KP3FT
If anybody is attempting censorship, it is Fox and their rabid rightwing pitbull:
Quote[/b] ]During the July 17 edition of Fox News' The O'Reilly Factor, discussing comments he made the previous night comparing the Daily Kos blog to the Nazi Party and to the Ku Klux Klan, host Bill O'Reilly asserted that "[t]he comparison is valid." O'Reilly was responding to a viewer who said in an email that O'Reilly "owe[d] me and thousands of others an apology," claiming that "you should not compare anything to the Nazis." O'Reilly replied: "Hate to say it, sir, that website traffics in hate, as do the Nazi websites. No difference."
* O'Reilly v. Daily Kos * (http://mediamatters.org/items/200707180006)
O'Reilly v. Daily Kos #1 (http://mediamatters.org/items/200707200014)
* O'Reilly v. Daily Kos #2 * (http://mediamatters.org/items/200707190008)
Quote[/b] ]After the tidal wave of protest from across the political spectrum as to his comparison of the liberal website the Daily Kos to the Nazis, he's still sticking with it. "Hate is hate. That website traffics in it, as do the Nazi websites. No difference."
Bill-O doesn't understand the difference between Nazis and Daily Kos. Well, we already knew he didn't understand the difference between the Nazis and the American victims of Nazi war crimes at Malmédy in World War II, so this should not be surprising. His stupidity is effervescent. It glows. It fairly ungulates and vibrates. I'll stop now; I'm getting Bill-O excited. Bill Orally, today's Worst Person in the World.
* O'Reilly v. Daily Kos #3 * (http://mediamatters.org/items/200707190011)
* Billo v. Kos #4 * (http://mediamatters.org/items/200707200014)
Quote[/b] ]Fox News contributor Kirsten Powers' assertion that "there's a lot of stuff that [Daily Kos bloggers] do that isn't horrible," host Bill O'Reilly said: "It's kind of like Al Capone." O'Reilly continued: "We'll only do bad things on Thursday, and we'll slaughter a bunch of people, but on Friday we'll go to church." In response to Powers' statement that "there's a lot of good diaries put up there," O'Reilly said: "[Former Italian fascist dictator Benito] Mussolini made the trains run on time."
* Billo v. Kos #5 * (http://mediamatters.org/items/200707240005)
Meanwhile, Back At Bill O'Reilly dot Com:
Quote[/b] ]On the July 24 edition of The O'Reilly Factor, in response to the suggestion that his website also contained offensive comments, O'Reilly accused Daily Kos of having "planted someone" on his website. However, according to screenshots of the comments in question (posted by Americablog here and here), this purported "plant[]" would have to have posted thousands of comments to O'Reilly's website, under different aliases. The commenter posting under the name Jack Kincade, who suggested following Hitler's example and burning down the U.S. Capitol, has more than 4,100 posts on BillOReilly.com.
* AHEM. * (http://mediamatters.org/items/200707260006)
Quote[/b] ]On the July 24 edition of Fox News' The O'Reilly Factor, during an interview with Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton's (D-NY) presidential campaign communications director Howard Wolfson, host Bill O'Reilly again compared the blog Daily Kos to white supremacist David Duke, asking: "[W]hat's the difference between David Duke and the hate stuff that he puts on his website with his bloggers and this? What is the difference?" Wolfson responded that, unlike Daily Kos, "David Duke's entire organization is rooted in hate and racism." O'Reilly then asked, "And the Daily Kos is not?" Wolfson replied: "No, it certainly is not ... It is primarily hundreds of thousands, as I said, good American citizens who are participating in our democracy." Wolfson later accused O'Reilly of "cherry-picking comments that are objectionable and attempting to smear an entire community of people. And it's wrong."
As Media Matters for America has documented (here and here), O'Reilly has repeatedly attacked Daily Kos, comparing it to Duke, the Ku Klux Klan, and the Nazi party. Wolfson appeared on O'Reilly's program to discuss a petition posted on Clinton's presidential campaign website titled "Tell Bill O'Reilly: Stop Smearing Grassroots Progressives."
* Billo * (http://mediamatters.org/items/200707260001)
http://mediamatters.org/static/images/item/oreillycomment-1.jpg
http://mediamatters.org/static/images/item/oreillycomment-2.jpg
http://mediamatters.org/static/images/item/oreillycomment-3.jpg
And there's more:
Bill-0-Hate.com (http://mediamatters.org/items/200707280004)
You were saying?
So, who's trying to restrict free speech? And who won't go on O'Reilly's show?
Quote[/b] ]...Mr. O'Reilly, I challenge you to bring me on your show to discuss the DailyKos, blogging, and your biased media coverage. If you want to besmirch the DailyKos and YearlyKos Convention, then why not have somebody who's a weekly blogger at the site, and speaker at the event?
Your attacks against the DailyKos are in fact a full out assault against the first amendment. You do not want to know what the public thinks because you are in the business of trying to think for them. You resent members of the blogging community for thinking outside the box and actually discussing news and issues rather just sitting on their couches and absorbing your opinion.
Mr. O'Reilly, I am a 24 year Navy Commander and a survivor of cancer. I have defended our freedoms around the world and live on to speak out against injustices in my district, our nation and the entire world. I will not be intimidated by you or your propaganda machine, nor will the bloggers of the world. If you want to challenge the Daily Kos Community, then I say Bring it On!
Eric Massa
Commander US Navy (ret.)
Candidate US Congress NY-29
PS - Bill, I hope you can stick around to do live blogging with me today and every Sunday from 3-6 pm Eastern. I've made using the Daily Kos to speak to voters a priority in my campaign, and I have yet to meet any Nazis on here.
Betcha Billo Wimps out... (http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2007/7/29/11313/1143) or cuts his mike as usual?
KA8DKT
07-30-2007, 02:38 AM
Quote[/b] (kb2vxa @ July 29 2007,18:14)]Who listens to radio? Only three hundred and fifty million people, that's all.
From an old PAMS spot on WABC Radio 77 New York with as much sarcasm as I can muster.
Actually, that was not a PAMS jingle, it was a "Radio" advertisement done by Stan Freeberg and I think the Jud Conlon Rhythmaires.
One punch line:
"Radio expands your mind."
"Doesn't television?"
"Yes, up to 21 inches..."
-gary
Too bad the left wing democrats can't fight the radical terroists with such zeal. Oh I forgot! There aren't any organized radical terrorists according to the left wing.
Quote[/b] (n2ize @ July 29 2007,17:26)]Fox news is infamous for giving biased opinions. They generally present a biased, one sided, non intellectual, and invalid point of view.
Must be why their ratings are so high.
Sad, but true. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/sad.gif
KA8DKT
07-30-2007, 03:08 AM
Quote[/b] (N2RJ @ July 29 2007,23:03)]Quote[/b] (n2ize @ July 29 2007,17:26)]Fox news is infamous for giving biased opinions. They generally present a biased, one sided, non intellectual, and invalid point of view.
Must be why their ratings are so high.
Sad, but true. #http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/sad.gif
Actually, their ratings ar not all that high...
-gary
Quote[/b] (W5JO @ July 29 2007,22:41)]Too bad the left wing democrats can't fight the radical terroists with such zeal. Oh I forgot! There aren't any organized radical terrorists according to the left wing.
Is that why the righties are crying so hard? Funny, you know where the terrorists are, you go first. Let me know when you find binLaden in Iraq. More than the Young Republicans, we have important first and fourth amendment rights to look after. Maybe we'll even have a bake sale for you.
http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif
Quote[/b] (N2RJ @ July 29 2007,23:03)]Quote[/b] (n2ize @ July 29 2007,17:26)]Fox news is infamous for giving biased opinions. They generally present a biased, one sided, non intellectual, and invalid point of view.
Must be why their ratings are so high.
Sad, but true. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/sad.gif
Not so sadly, Daily Kos numbers compare to his show. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif
w2amr
07-30-2007, 09:05 AM
Quote[/b] (W5JO @ July 29 2007,19:41)]Too bad the left wing democrats can't fight the radical terroists with such zeal. #Oh I forgot! #There aren't any organized radical terrorists according to the left wing.
Could you please provide a list of people on the left who have stated that ," There aren't any organized radical terrorists" . We will wait to be enlightened.
Quote[/b] (KP3FT @ July 29 2007,16:35)]Quote[/b] (nx6d @ July 29 2007,13:14)]Quote[/b] (KP3FT @ July 29 2007,10:04)]Quote[/b] (nx6d @ July 29 2007,10:48)]So what?
This tactic has been used for years by people with diverse points of view.
Your buddies Lou Sheldon and Donald Wildmon are prime users of this tactic. That's their right, as it is MoveOn.org's right to go in the same direction.
Spare us the "Faux News" as victims rant.
Personally, I won't patronize ANYONE who advertises on KSFO in San Francisco. Fox "News" advertisers aren't high on my list either.
Dave NX6D
Tulelake, CA
Whoa, relax...must have hit a nerve there. #I don't think it's right for any side to do it, and also I've never even heard of Sheldon and Wildman. #
I wonder if it's even an effective tactic; from an advertiser's point of view, it seems like common sense to advertise a product in mediums of all political, sociological, etc. opinions, simply because you get more viewers. #The only time I could see it being effective is if the advertiser actually loses more customers from boycotts than it gains by advertising on the offending media outlet.
You're an anti-abortion fanatic and you don't know who Lou Sheldon and Donald Wildmon are?
I find that hard to believe...
Nope, never heard of them. #I'll Google them later. #Also, I don't watch Fox News here since I don't have cable or satellite TV.
What part of my anti-abortion stance makes me a fanatic?
You're kidding, right?
You started a thread about the topic and posted photos of aborted fetuses. If you think that's "mainstream" you're seriously deluded.
Abortion is an "on the margin" issue and hardly worth the effort when we have a major problem with the Iraq war going on right now. Only a fanatic would place that issue at the top of the stack.
Dave NX6D
Tulelake, CA
Quote[/b] (KP3FT @ July 29 2007,17:07)]Quote[/b] (n2ize @ July 29 2007,15:26)]Fox news is infamous for giving biased opinions. They generally present a biased, one sided, non intellectual, and invalid point of view. #it's well within the rights of groups like moveon.org to express their concern to the advertizers and put pressure on them.
I agree it's within their rights, and I wouldn't presume to take those rights away, but I still don't think it's necessary to take it the level of boycotts and pressure on advertisers, with all the other news services out there that are reporting what they want. #
I have a few issues of my own, but I'm not promoting boycotts to see that they are reported better, so any people (not you N2IZE, because you aren't) out there trying to pin a straw-man on me and invalidate my view by an assumed hypocritical stance on my part won't have any luck. #
Also, I've seriously never heard of those two guys...I don't watch FOX, and I don't listen to talk radio either. #I have in the past listened to both liberal and conservative talk radio and noticed so much bias and spin that they both turned me off. #I prefer going to the most reputable sources and getting both sides of an issue before making any conclusions. #Reporting of facts would be nice, without one iota of opinion, but I fear that is rare. #
73 Jeff KP3FT
Pure unadulterated Bravo Sierra.
If you didn't watch Fox "News", then why make the post?
Are you blind to all the other boycotts out there, or is the anti-boycott option only valid when it's used against your ideological breathern?
Dave NX6D
Tulelake, CA
Quote[/b] (n2ize @ July 29 2007,20:26)]Fox news is infamous for giving biased opinions. They generally present a biased, one sided, non intellectual, and invalid point of view. #it's well within the rights of groups like moveon.org to express their concern to the advertizers and put pressure on them.
Aren't opinions inherently bias?
My question is, are they slanting the news? Are they presenting something other than fact as fact?
Billo, Colmes, Hannity, Greta, etc...are all opinion commentators. If you are turning to them for news, you are mistaken. If you want their take on the news, go for it.
Quote[/b] (nx6d @ July 30 2007,12:05)]Quote[/b] (KP3FT @ July 29 2007,16:35)]Quote[/b] (nx6d @ July 29 2007,13:14)]Quote[/b] (KP3FT @ July 29 2007,10:04)]Quote[/b] (nx6d @ July 29 2007,10:48)]So what?
This tactic has been used for years by people with diverse points of view.
Your buddies Lou Sheldon and Donald Wildmon are prime users of this tactic. That's their right, as it is MoveOn.org's right to go in the same direction.
Spare us the "Faux News" as victims rant.
Personally, I won't patronize ANYONE who advertises on KSFO in San Francisco. Fox "News" advertisers aren't high on my list either.
Dave NX6D
Tulelake, CA
Whoa, relax...must have hit a nerve there. I don't think it's right for any side to do it, and also I've never even heard of Sheldon and Wildman.
I wonder if it's even an effective tactic; from an advertiser's point of view, it seems like common sense to advertise a product in mediums of all political, sociological, etc. opinions, simply because you get more viewers. The only time I could see it being effective is if the advertiser actually loses more customers from boycotts than it gains by advertising on the offending media outlet.
You're an anti-abortion fanatic and you don't know who Lou Sheldon and Donald Wildmon are?
I find that hard to believe...
Nope, never heard of them. I'll Google them later. Also, I don't watch Fox News here since I don't have cable or satellite TV.
What part of my anti-abortion stance makes me a fanatic?
You're kidding, right?
You started a thread about the topic and posted photos of aborted fetuses. If you think that's "mainstream" you're seriously deluded.
Abortion is an "on the margin" issue and hardly worth the effort when we have a major problem with the Iraq war going on right now. Only a fanatic would place that issue at the top of the stack.
Dave NX6D
Tulelake, CA
Well it's nice to know that the life of a fetus is so important to them. OTOH, seems that the same people find life gets very unimportant if you're a male, over 19 and in Iraq.
n3ixq
07-30-2007, 04:25 PM
It's not like there is no competition with news service...
MSNBC, CNN, CNN Headline news, Fox and I'm not mentioning the broadcast. Seems to me that if you don't like it, turn the channel. But my investigation says that Fox is number 1 right now. So they are drawing all the ad dollars.
Advertisers go where the people are. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif
KI4ODO
07-30-2007, 04:34 PM
Quote[/b] (n2ize @ July 29 2007,15:26)]Fox news is infamous for giving biased opinions. They generally present a biased, one sided, non intellectual, and invalid point of view. #it's well within the rights of groups like moveon.org to express their concern to the advertizers and put pressure on them.
Have you watched ABC or CBS news lately?? #Oh yeah, they shoot right down the middle #http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif #No agenda there huh? Talk about liberal media!
Of course I must admit, back when ol' Billy Boy was banging half the whitehouse staff, they crucified him to. They have their favorites, but ratings and money trump all of that.
One thing that I'm fairly sure of. No matter how much Americans don't want to believe it, the media is to a point state controled. There is a little license from the FCC that you must have to be a network, and without that, you have nothing. So FOX, CNN, ABC, CBS, and the rest will all fall into boundries, they will only report what the government allows. They will choose "sides" and give opposing view points to keep the sheeple from realizing that we have a government controlled media. Why else do you think there is no coverage of the numbers of people now winning lawsuites against the IRS on the legal basis of income taxes? The government will not let that be discussed but so much.
Boycott this....
http://www.newsmax.com/scripts....ge=http (http://www.newsmax.com/scripts/printer_friendly.pl?page=http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2007/7/30/201545.shtml?s=ic)
w2amr
07-31-2007, 11:23 AM
Quote[/b] (K3XR @ July 31 2007,04:16)]Boycott this....
http://www.newsmax.com/scripts....ge=http (http://www.newsmax.com/scripts/printer_friendly.pl?page=http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2007/7/30/201545.shtml?s=ic)
Danno has sunk to a new low. Linking up to the site of a hateful, homophobic, bible beater. For Shame !
hate.com (http://www.afa.net/)
kg6amw
07-31-2007, 01:29 PM
Quote[/b] (KP3FT @ July 29 2007,10:44)]Link (http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D8QL52780&show_article=1)
Yes. Please waste as much time as you can on this. Thanks.
k0dxc
07-31-2007, 01:39 PM
Quote[/b] (w2amr @ July 29 2007,13:09)]Like this.........
link (http://boycottford.com/)
Oh boy another thread... http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif
KP3FT
07-31-2007, 07:09 PM
Quote[/b] (nx6d @ July 30 2007,09:05)]Quote[/b] (KP3FT @ July 29 2007,16:35)]Quote[/b] (nx6d @ July 29 2007,13:14)]Quote[/b] (KP3FT @ July 29 2007,10:04)]Quote[/b] (nx6d @ July 29 2007,10:48)]So what?
This tactic has been used for years by people with diverse points of view.
Your buddies Lou Sheldon and Donald Wildmon are prime users of this tactic. That's their right, as it is MoveOn.org's right to go in the same direction.
Spare us the "Faux News" as victims rant.
Personally, I won't patronize ANYONE who advertises on KSFO in San Francisco. Fox "News" advertisers aren't high on my list either.
Dave NX6D
Tulelake, CA
Whoa, relax...must have hit a nerve there. I don't think it's right for any side to do it, and also I've never even heard of Sheldon and Wildman.
I wonder if it's even an effective tactic; from an advertiser's point of view, it seems like common sense to advertise a product in mediums of all political, sociological, etc. opinions, simply because you get more viewers. The only time I could see it being effective is if the advertiser actually loses more customers from boycotts than it gains by advertising on the offending media outlet.
You're an anti-abortion fanatic and you don't know who Lou Sheldon and Donald Wildmon are?
I find that hard to believe...
Nope, never heard of them. I'll Google them later. Also, I don't watch Fox News here since I don't have cable or satellite TV.
What part of my anti-abortion stance makes me a fanatic?
You're kidding, right?
You started a thread about the topic and posted photos of aborted fetuses. If you think that's "mainstream" you're seriously deluded.
Abortion is an "on the margin" issue and hardly worth the effort when we have a major problem with the Iraq war going on right now. Only a fanatic would place that issue at the top of the stack.
Dave NX6D
Tulelake, CA
Look over the facts of what abortion is, how common it is, how many people die because of it, how many feel unbelievable pain before death, and so on, then get back to me. I don't think you will though, not because of intelligence, but simply because of disinterest and apathy. I think it may also be because it might just infringe on your comfort zone of preconceived beliefs.
I am simply giving information. The big freak-out over the pictures I posted is quite telling. Anyone who would bother meditating just for a moment as to WHY they were so offensive would probably reach my own conclusions on the issue. If not the same conclusion, then a reasoned response defending their own conclusion in the light of the same facts and evidence. However, does the majority ever ask WHY? It's easy, yet it seems so rare. I'm not any more intelligent than anyone else, but at least I ask WHY, even of my own motives. Really, I admit I am naive...I thought giving some facts and evidence would cause people to use their human logic and reach a rational conclusion based on them. Boy, was I wrong...I forget that emotion takes precedant over logic.
THINK about this hypothetical situation... living creatures (cats, dogs, etc.), having the capacity to feel pain to the level we do and likely more so, being dismembered alive, and burned alive via salt solutions, until dead, numbering in the hundreds of thousands, every year, because they are not wanted. Right or wrong? Now, replace "(cats, dogs, etc.)" with non-hypothetical, real situation of "human babies". Now, is it right or wrong? The factual numbers are real, the evidence is real. If you answer "wrong" to the first one, and "right" to the second one, WHY? What is the difference? If you answer "wrong" to the second one, is it still a "marginal" issue, and if so, WHY?
The Iraq war is a big problem; if you bothered to read my posts, you would see that I already agree that Iraq is a problem and needs resolving... There are LOTS of dead people in Iraq, over a war that should not ever have started. Right or wrong? I say wrong, it needs to be resolved. I am not ignoring other issues in favor of one, I am trying to get people aware of a forgotten issue BECAUSE it has been reduced to what you call "on the margin". There is a serious problem in our country if abortion is NOT at the top of the list, along WITH every other important issue, as I have said before. I never excluded other issues as being unimportant. If that makes me a fanatic, then I am one, in spades...
On the contrary, if someone can look at those and other pictures, read the factual evidence, and still support abortion, then THEY are the fanatic, not me. I would go so far as to say they are inhuman and criminally insane, no different than the Nazi "doctor" experimenters, and I am not exaggerating. Almost as guilty, are those who may be aware of the possibility that such a horror exists in the U.S, but decide not to research the issue.
73 Jeff KP3FT
Quote[/b] (K3XR @ July 31 2007,06:16)]Boycott this....
http://www.newsmax.com/scripts....ge=http (http://www.newsmax.com/scripts/printer_friendly.pl?page=http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2007/7/30/201545.shtml?s=ic)
Yes, and the AFA is the vocal few who would remove all entertaining shows from TV and make it suitable only for Ned Flanders.
In other words, they're extremists.
KP3FT
07-31-2007, 07:22 PM
Quote[/b] (nx6d @ July 30 2007,09:08)]Quote[/b] (KP3FT @ July 29 2007,17:07)]Quote[/b] (n2ize @ July 29 2007,15:26)]Fox news is infamous for giving biased opinions. They generally present a biased, one sided, non intellectual, and invalid point of view. it's well within the rights of groups like moveon.org to express their concern to the advertizers and put pressure on them.
I agree it's within their rights, and I wouldn't presume to take those rights away, but I still don't think it's necessary to take it the level of boycotts and pressure on advertisers, with all the other news services out there that are reporting what they want.
I have a few issues of my own, but I'm not promoting boycotts to see that they are reported better, so any people (not you N2IZE, because you aren't) out there trying to pin a straw-man on me and invalidate my view by an assumed hypocritical stance on my part won't have any luck.
Also, I've seriously never heard of those two guys...I don't watch FOX, and I don't listen to talk radio either. I have in the past listened to both liberal and conservative talk radio and noticed so much bias and spin that they both turned me off. I prefer going to the most reputable sources and getting both sides of an issue before making any conclusions. Reporting of facts would be nice, without one iota of opinion, but I fear that is rare.
73 Jeff KP3FT
Pure unadulterated Bravo Sierra.
If you didn't watch Fox "News", then why make the post?
Are you blind to all the other boycotts out there, or is the anti-boycott option only valid when it's used against your ideological breathern?
Dave NX6D
Tulelake, CA
Wow, it seems I need a notarized disclaimer or something, included with a new topic. Don't tell me I'm a liar unless you can show it. I made the statement that I don't agree with the policy of boycotting from ANY side. The FOX news item was interesting to me, purely because of the issue of boycotting itself. I did not see any other headline reporting boycotts of other news agencies. If the headline stated that CNN was getting boycotted, I would have posted it. To everyone: read very carefully...I do not watch FOX news. I do not listen to talk radio. I have never in my life heard of the two guys mentioned. I have lost interest in Googling them because I don't care what their personal opinions are, but will do so because I said I would.
Is it possible to read a post without jumping to conclusions? I thought the topic was interesting, and thought discussion would be intersting, minus the assumptions being made.
73 Jeff KP3FT