(Thanks, Peter!)
-
Archives
- August 2015
- July 2015
- June 2015
- May 2015
- April 2015
- March 2015
- February 2015
- January 2015
- December 2014
- November 2014
- October 2014
- September 2014
- August 2014
- July 2014
- June 2014
- May 2014
- April 2014
- March 2014
- February 2014
- January 2014
- December 2013
- November 2013
- October 2013
- September 2013
- July 2013
- June 2013
- May 2013
- April 2013
- March 2013
- February 2013
- January 2013
- December 2012
- November 2012
- October 2012
- September 2012
- August 2012
- July 2012
- June 2012
- May 2012
- April 2012
- March 2012
- February 2012
- January 2012
- December 2011
- November 2011
- October 2011
- September 2011
- August 2011
- May 2011
- March 2011
- November 2010
- October 2010
- August 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- January 2009
- December 2008
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- February 2008
- January 2008
- December 2007
- November 2007
- October 2007
- September 2007
- August 2007
- July 2007
- June 2007
- May 2007
- April 2007
- March 2007
- February 2007
- January 2007
- December 2006
- November 2006
- October 2006
- September 2006
- August 2006
- July 2006
- June 2006
- May 2006
- April 2006
- March 2006
- February 2006
- January 2006
- December 2005
- November 2005
- October 2005
- September 2005
- August 2005
- July 2005
- June 2005
- May 2005
- April 2005
- March 2005
- February 2005
- January 2005
- December 2004
- November 2004
- October 2004
- September 2004
- August 2004
- July 2004
- June 2004
- May 2004
- October 2003
- September 2003
- August 2003
- July 2003
- June 2003
- May 2003
- April 2003
- March 2003
- January 2003
- December 2002
- November 2002
- October 2002
- September 2002
- August 2002
-
Meta
It is really pathetic up to what point Fox News has to go to really convince people that the all-out war in Iraq as well as the deaths of US soldiers and incredible spending on US budget is good for the economy. Reality is that the US cannot borrow money forever, and if the deficit gets to be too critical, it will place the US and the world in general in another recession.
Surely I cannot be the only person hoping to see at least a partial transcript of that broadcast? I would imagine that to avoid this blog being hit by a Fox lawsuit, we only need to find a conservative blogger who has license to wax eloquent about its main points?
Any one out there who can provide me with a few moments of idle entertainment?
Man. This is the kind of thing I’d expect to be a humourous exaggeration of Fox’s bias, something seen in a Fark photoshop contest. This is so pathetic it’s funny… but still pathetic.
this made me chuckle, it is sort of as if they are saying; “massive death, it too can be productive for american interests”
This is why I’m for bias in the media. A sanity bias, that is.
Yes indeed. This is why we declined to add ‘Fox’ to ‘News’ on Hyperwords, our Firefox Extension that makes all the words on the web interactive (like the sales line there?). When we make it customizable, people can add Fox if they like, but for now, it just ain’t news in our editorial opinion.
This FOX headline is a blatant example of the mindset that places “good” in opposition to “evil.” Once one does that, its easy to rationalize violence. Such a mind would ask – “But wait! I want to read the transcript. Perhaps there is a valid point here.”
I’m always a little irked when I see “cost of the iraq war” counters on websites. I realize that the intentions of such counters is to try and scrounge up as many arguments as possible against the war, so in that sense I have sympathy. After all, if such arguments can push some war-supporters back, they have validity. But on the other hand, it sends an empty message, failing to reach to the core of the issue. It implies that if the monetary cost was not outrageous, there might exist justification for the murder of thousands. Humanity need not an “argument” against war. Humanity need not the “transcript” to this FOX discussion.
It implies that if the monetary cost was not outrageous, there might exist justification for the murder of thousands.
Well, the sad truth of the matter is that $250 billion hits a lot closer to home for a lot of people than 35,000 dead foreigners. All a money counter really implies, though, is that the monetary cost can be ascertained from a single reliable source and will stop accumulating after we leave.
Tom said:
Yes. A money counter on its own doesn’t imply anything more than that. I should have said that such money counters could be used to escape the central issue at stake by attacking this human war on superficial grounds. That, of course, is not a problem with the counter. It is a problem with the person creating significance out of a relatively insignificant statistic. How much this war costs is not significant in my eyes, as I am not interested in stopping just this war. I am interested in stopping war.
You were right in pointing out that I was painting a broad conclusion that those whose post a counter are automatically implying that $$$ is what is primarily at stake. Sorry, I didn’t mean that – it came out wrong.