FoxNews' Glenn Beck

The T wrote: crimhead wrote: The T wrote: Ok, Ok.... You win.  Can "Americans" at l;east accept the metric system?  No thanks. We like our system of inches and gallons. It's really so ridiculous to prefer a system based on eights and fourths and twelfths ( sounds more like musical notation) over a incredibly simple system based on tentths, where, instead of changing a measure name (inches to feet) you just add a simple prefix (centi, mili, etc). At least Americans haven't chosen to drive on the left side... Yet

It all depends on perspective I guess, I was raised using the messed up system, so to me it is easier to understand measurements, but in metric I wouldn't be able to approximate the same measurements in my head. It's too far ingrained into my brain to teach me any different now.

^ in south america they call us yankees, gringos, etc.

They think it offends us but we don't even know what they mean.

one is a perenial champion sports team and the other is incomprehensible

I would call those who reside in the United States "those who call south americans 'illegals'"
we're so nationalist here we think to be born somewhere else actually makes you unlawful

a better dispute:

Why do the British 'Do this'.

When they should "Do This."


Edited by RoyFairbank - April 14 2010 at 21:43

The T wrote: the british should drive on the right. And use meters.

We use meters in America. You have to put a quarter in every fifteen minutes or they tow your car.

Edited by Slartibartfast - April 15 2010 at 17:51

Make no mistake, Glenn Beck can stick it to the taxpayers as well as any liberal politician:

 ^ But what is their best interest:  Advertising revenue?  Image?  Ratings?  On balance the U.S. is center-right, so why doesn't CNN join Fox and add the apparent majority to their viewership?  The answer must be political bias.  Remember it was launched by one huge liberal, and that spirit remains regardless of whether they're up or down in audience shares, right?  In fact I imagine when Ted Turner owned CNN, it didn't matter much if they had a lot of viewers, he could just bankroll it till it caught-on. 

CNN's bottom line was whatever Turner - and now Time - want it to be.  It makes $ because it's a well established network with a good (albeit boring) reputation of international reporting with a slightly socio-progressive slant.  CNN jump ship?  I doubt it--  if Conservative journalism were to catch on then they'd be in a position to counter it, not join it.

Slartibartfast wrote: Atavachron wrote: one huge liberal One huge liberal who apparently loves to eat buffalo. On a side note, I grew up in the Atlanta area and am still here.  Turner owned a TV station before he launched CNN.  They used a bit from the Dixie Dregs' Freefall in their promo add.  I don't remember the track off hand.  I think it was Wages Of Weirdness.

Mmmm.....his Montana Grill was one of my favorite restaurants.  My wife and eye went there when she had appointments in Raleigh regarding her surgery (on her Is).

Atavachron wrote:  ^ But what is their best interest:  Advertising revenue?  Image?  Ratings?  On balance the U.S. is center-right, so why doesn't CNN join Fox and add the apparent majority to their viewership?  The answer must be political bias.  Remember it was launched by one huge liberal, and that spirit remains regardless of whether they're up or down in audience shares, right?  In fact I imagine when Ted Turner owned CNN, it didn't matter much if they had a lot of viewers, he could just bankroll it till it caught-on.  CNN's bottom line was whatever Turner - and now Time - want it to be.  It makes $ because it's a well established network with a good (albeit boring) reputation of international reporting with a slightly socio-progressive slant.  CNN jump ship?  I doubt it--  if Conservative journalism were to catch on then they'd be in a position to counter it, not join it.

CNN "socio-progressive?"

Total support for the wars and the bailouts and everything, and "socio-progressive?"



The US media is tied in with the most priviledged stratum of American society and reflect its views - they are active partners and always work with and consult big business, the government and the military.

There is no "socio-progressive" force in the American media - look at the supposed bastion of "american liberalism" the New York Times, Judith Miller and Co. in prison for protecting Cheney's illegal activities, promoted the war and the weapons of mass destruction charges, call every day for austerity...

Nope- nothing socio-progressive about that.