CdnFox

Intelligence. try it sometime. It would seem like that to an !diot i suppose. Oh shit kid, there's been TONNES of lawsuits about media lying in the states and even a few in Canada. The MSM's lie ALL THE TIME. Remember when the convoy was funded by radical americans? But really this isn't about lying - this is about defamation which is different. So you were wrong there as well.

SORRY but making EVERY few WORDS use caps DOESN'T actually change ANYTHING either. And logic and reason is in fact valid evidence. Of course - you being a leftie you might not have ever heard that before And lets face it - you know i'm right or you would have made a counterargument and presented your own facts. I mean seriously - how thick do you have to be to make an assertion that an assertion without providing facts is meaningless without providing facts? (yes - the previous sentace does in fact make sense. Read it again. Deep breaths, take a break part way through if you need to).

It's pretty clear he's not. This is just how he thinks of things. You can make all the excuses for him you like but at the end of the day he was very clear about what he said - and it wasn't your twist on it.

Thank you, thank you, I'm here all week. Tip your waitresses! Denouncing deluded commie putin--pals a specialty! (bow bow bow)

Nope. They're not guessing and they clearly support the coops. It's just what you said was untrue. Sorry. that's because they lumped single owner small businesses in with that - and they're the most likely to fail period. Sorry. I get you want socailism to look like it works but it really doesn't Now - technically every single public traded company is a co-op - the employees have as much right to own a share of the business as anyone else. But there's nothing actually more stable about co-ops. Other than they tend to only exist in a specific segment. Well we can agree on the first part. However - gov'ts are NOT a way to keep that from happening, govts tend to race towards that end even faster. That's why any attempt at a 'socialistic' or communal society managed by gov't is doomed to failure over time. Sure it can. Donald is VERY skilled and so is elon, and they've both risen up. What's the problem. What a load of crap. Trump was SORT of born to wealth but not really. Musk wasn't born to wealth at all - he earned it. ANd in fact the majority of millionaires and billionares come from low to middle class. Which proves that you are ENTIRELY wrong. Bull. Socialism seeks to repress anyone above the average. Socialism seeks the lowest common denominator, not the highest. So socialism is death to merit. It actively punishes those who excel.

And you can't buy that kind of advertising. They probably do as well. The fact is that if they wanted this solved it would have been solved already out of court by the insurance people. Instead this will drag on for years and fox will wind up benefitting. Even if they do have to pay something eventually it'll be a decade from now and in the meantime they'll have had earnings of about 25 billion dollars. Take a look at the viewership - fox VASTLY outnumbered everyone else in feb https://www.adweek.com/tvnewser/here-are-fox-news-msnbc-and-cnn-ratings-for-february-2023/524861/ And they've been going up for years now. So this kind of thing is worth every penny to them. Their viewership isn't suffering for it - it got better for it. I'm sure they don't want to pay any cash if they can avoid it but if you think this is going to convince them to do business differently you're sadly mistaken.

Oh but they're free to lie about anything else? Please. You condone dishonesty and extremeism in media you like while condemning it at fox and that means this is going to continue. Fox will wind up benefiting from this in the longer run. People don't care that they lie a little. if they did then neither trump no biden would ever have been president. I dislike seeing lies or excessive partisan rhetoric in any media period - with the possible exception of those who bill themselves specifically that way so people know up front. But the fact is that it sells papers as the saying goes.

Not if what it really wants is attention. And that's what it really wants. Fox is going to make lots of money as long as it gets attention There is no such suggestion. The problem isn't the child. The problem is the parents. Remember the left wing media is EVERY BIT JUST AS BAD. So the answer is we have to be better consumers. That's really the only thing that works. And that's not terrribly likely to happen. As evidenced by the fact you posted an article thats 'every bit as salty as fox news is as if it were a legit piece Consumers like that kind of stuff and they're not likely to give it up anytime soon

Is SHEEEE The !diot here? because it's kind of soundling like someone else is being the !diot here So life doesn't apply to non mamillians? I'm not sure you thought that through. And the nature of the consequences doesn't change the fact you do stupid things. We all do. Can't condemn humanity for that. Well it isn't. As we've discussed. Repeating a lie doesn't make it true. Sorry. And it's also not relevant to that point. You claim a fetus is a human being -you would have to demonstrate why that's true for that to be a factor in your argument. Nope. The vast majority of rapes do not require a trip to the hospital. I don't know woh told you that but it's simply not true. Getting punched in the face is an act of violence as well but we've all gotten into fist fights when we were younger right? How many times did you go to the hospital for it out of all the fights you got into? Where did i say i was for or against anything? All i said is you can't call it a compromise solution AND i pointed out where you were wrong in your assertions. Where does "science" say that? If anything it says otherwise. https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/sexual-assault-remains-dramatically-underreported https://www.rainn.org/statistics/criminal-justice-system https://www.huffpost.com/entry/rape-study-report-america-us_n_4310765 Didn't have to wait long didja. The vast majority of rapes go unreported. Sorry sparky. Why? Their body won't change. Nothing will be different. Even sophisticated hormone testing can miss it. Saying 'they're stupid' just makes you look stupid. If you have to lie to make your point, you don't have a very good point. Sure - but first off for that argument to work you'd have to prove it was a baby. Instead of just a fetus. As i noted before you'd have to make a convincing argument it's a human being. So? A heart beat isn't what makes a human a human. If a human's heart stops are they dead at that moment? Of course not - people's hearts stop all the time and they're revived. If we took a heart out of someone and kept it alive in a jar - would it still be a human being? And it's not even a real circulatory heartbeat yet, it's just the muscles forming and beginning to learn how to contract. So why exactly would that mean it's a human? Other than Muh Feels? Yawn. Wake me when your brain starts to work again. Irrelevant. You've obviously never read or even understood the case. It had nothing to do with 'abortion' in and of itself. It simply asked whether or not abortion was addressed within the constitution. It was a case about the constitution not abortion. I never liked the verdict in that case to be honest. I think the supreme court was right to strike it down. But it's got SFA to do with 'abortion' other than whether or not it's in the constitution. So the tech available is irrelevant.

Sure. That's the problem we face today. We're becoming more and more tribal and locked in our echo chambers. As you say- more naughty children. One only has to look at the last 15 years to see you're right. Er... well if you want to go give tucker a spanking then more power to you, but just the though of it would cost me a few nights sleep And spanking one bad child while allowing all the others on both the left and right to go unpunished actually makes things worse. You have to be consistent. And our society isn't interested in holding the children to account right now. Nahhh. Its free publicity that will wind up benefiting all the bad children moving forward. If a child acts out looking for attention, even if it's negative attention, and it gets attention... guess what?

like i said - you can't even do it till after a missed period so it's not actually that 'easy' - its impossible for much of that 6 weeks. Sure - people are stupid. I bet if we looked real hard we'd find things you've done in your life that are stupid too looking back at it, wouldn't we If we are going to condemn people for being stupid we might as well just nuke the whole planet. Well you'd have to demonstrate that a baby is a human life. And that's not so easy. Obviously at some point between being an unfertilized egg and it's first college exam it becomes a human being , but exactly where is a bit tricky. You may BELIEVE it's from conception and thats fine but then we can't really call this a compromise solution. First off - there absolutely is worse trauma. FAR worse. Getting killed is over quickly. However its just dumb to claim that was my comparison. A woman who's been severely emotionally and physically traumatized may not go to the police right away - whether the baby is aborted or not. That's just life. No, most of the time they don't. The vast majority of rapes go unreported. I dont' know where you got that idea. well as we've discussed that's a lie. And if you have to lie to make your point then it's not a very good point In fact many won't even realize they're pregnant that fast. And even those who are 'watching' for it have to wait till a period has been missed, so that could be easily 4 weeks before they can even test - and even then the tests are not 100 percent accurate. So get real. You can make a DIFFERENT argument that says 6 weeks is all we can give for some reason or another but it's a lie to say its 'plenty of time' so if your argument hinges on that, then you've got a problem with your argument don't you.

Well your article tends to disagree with you despite the fact that its trying its best to support your position. It's full of "can be" and "might be" and "in some cases" and such - and cites no actual research or numbers. Further it basically admits that from a profitability point of view it's not as effective. And of course its' comparing apples to oranges - larger corporations to smaller business worker coops. But - we already know that smaller businesses tend to be more efficient as far as labour goes. A small 'regular' business is more efficient on average than a larger corporation by far. So as suspected - a 'less than true' truth. But those two are critical. You cannot have a human society or group without social and political power being involved and humans will always organize that into a hierarchy. It is the nature of every pack or flock animal in existence. Well that's not really a 'hierarchy'. It would be if that doctor decided who gets to learn and who doesn't and controls the medical services from that perspective. A bunch of feudal states or more often one very large state controlled by an elite class. Which we've certainly seen. And it's a problem with all socialistic or communal models. Of course the problem with a true hierarchy model such a s a meritocracy or 'pure' capitalist economic model is that it leaves those who don't fit on the hierarchical scale to suffer and fall by the wayside and die. In nature that has some advantage but as thinking creatures we don't really like that. So the best models tend to be a meritocracy and free market style hierarchy with a VERY small amount of communal model included to make sure that people aren't just cast aside. Then the trick is to create as many successful hierarchy's as possible. Business ones, sports ones, computer programming ones, basket weaving ones, whatever - as many areas where people can compete and find SOME skill they have that will allow them to be of value. The more there are, the more people are likely to find the ladder that they can do well on.

So your argument is that Justin Trudeau and his style of gov't will be the same as PP and his style of gov't? Do you really feel that's a defensible postilion?

So here's a few of my concerns when thinking about it as a "compromise". A lot of girls won't even realize they are pregnant until almost 6 weeks. You miss a period and then you start to wonder - well you're already potentially 4 weeks at that point. It could be 6 weeks before you even take a pregnancy test and figure it out. It's not very much time at all. Remember - it's not 6 weeks after you find out - it's 6 weeks after you get pregnant whether you know about the pregnancy or not. A lot of people get pregnant even with protection. It happens. But more importantly - pregancy tests require you to miss a period before they're accurate. IT's not like if you have sex today then tomorrow you're going to test positive. So yeah even if a girl has unprotected sex once and thinks "i may be preggers", it might be weeks before she can even find out. A lot of traumatized women won't go to the police right away . Get raped a few times and then talk about it. However this law does allow for rape to be an exception Well this is the argument from those who believe that the fetus is a human being from conception of course. And that's fine - but that is NOT a compromise solution. A compromise solution would have to at least give a reasonable chance for the woman to discover she's pregnant and have time to arrange a medical procedure.

Well that depends on what you mean by 'co-ops'. And how big the 'co op' you're talking about is. If you mean like a farmer's co-op or co-op store, no. Sorry, you're dead wrong. If you mean co-op housing, certainly not. The best you can say about that is it helps keep prices lower but that's because it has less value. But perhaps you mean something else, 'co-op' is a pretty wide reaching term. Frankly i think we'll see pretty quick this is another one of your ... ahhh... "less than true" facts Communism isn't about working together. Even capitalism REQUIRES that people work together. But communism suggests that their is no such thing as 'hierarchy', and that is simply against human nature entirely. We are definitely pack animals - but like almost all pack animals we are hierarchy based. This is something the left often pretends doesn't exist, which is why they THINK its possible for the 'communal' model to work on any kind of scale. But it doesn't. And at the end of the day that's the problem with the left these days - they don't care about facts, they don't care about science, they don't care about human nautre - they care about 'muh feels' and what they perceive as desirable and demand that their vision of utopia is true despite any evidence to the contrary.

Well lets put it this way - if they do then they did before tucker showed up. Like i said, news today tends to be less about informing people and more about manipulating their confirmation bias. Either postively by stroking the things they believe already in some manner or negatively by enraging they by refuting things they believe already in some manner - both get you clicks and both get you discussed around the web etc etc. The article you posted is no different, it uses emotionally charged language and really tries to press the buttons of those who dislike fox in an exaggerated and over-the-top manner that those who do will point to and say "not fair not true". These days its all about pushing people's tribal buttons rather than actually informing.

That would be true, if i had said anything remotely close to that. Which i did not. Go read it again. Slowly.

Well, in fairness you're complaining about tuckers's gross and partisan spin on the truth designed to appeal to the confirmation bias of his viewers by offering as an example an article which is a gross and partisan spin on the truth designed to appeal to the confirmation bias of it's viewers I would argue that the article and tucker share a great deal in common. They're meant to leave their target audiences chuckling and saying to themselves 'it's funny because it's true', while leaving opponents sputtering in fury over the "Unfairness" of the exaggerated or ridiculous portions of the show/article. Both are excellent examples of the art - inciting enough to get both sides reading with just enough truth to make it hard to dismiss entirely. Infotainment - how to get people riled up for clicks and giggles.

Well as i noted if people are aware he's not telling the truth, then when he doesn't tell the truth it's not really propaganda If you're aware watching it that it's a lie then it can't be considered as such. Pretty much all the media lies now. And even when ones like cnn do is in many cases i'm reluctant to call it 'propaganda', which would imply they were attempting to promote a narrative, and more 'pandering to their demographic for clicks'. Sure - some news stories are propaganda and some FEELS like it, like when NBC altered the tape on the trevon martin case for example, but even there i think it was to generate outrage for the purpose of selling papers, not policy. It's my contention that the legal opinion which you posted is correct and that the viewers know that the show "lies" and that tucker's opinions are meant to be taken as not an accurate representation of the truth. Yikes. We just met - leave my balls out of your tripe thank you very much Testify brother! Well - thats probably good. We all need our rest, you can't be staying up EVERY night. Look, joking and rhetoric aside obviously you lean left and i'm more of a center-right guy so there's going to be disagreements and such, but if we're keeping it real i think we both know that tucker's show isn't meant to be taken terribly seriously, That isn't to say he doesn't sometimes raise good points etc or subject worth discussing one way or another but most of the time it's feel good confirmation bias based infoainment of which there's many left wing examples as well.

Yeah, i think it's going to be tough. But the fact is it'll drag out well into the nomination for the Rebpuclicans. I mean they're not even going back to trial till december. And it'll be a long process after that. Trumps' going to campaign with that hanging over his head? We'll see but while it wont' affect his core much i think it will sting him a little

Yes - i noted that. HE was - briefly I didn't miss anyone i just didn't name everyone. I mentioned turner because he was a good example of the ones i mentioned who didn't make it long. They do historically but they havent' always been winners. He would have lost just as bad. Dion was pretty bad tho. Yeah. Politics will always be a rich environment for 'what if'.

Kid - you posted something as a 'quote' that i never said - you then edited the post and erased it when you got busted. And people saw that and can see the edit. You weren't misquoted. Think how pathetic that makes you. You literally are trying to lie your way out of something you did on the internet. How sad of a person do you have to be to do that, to go back and alter your post and lie about it? And never mind anyone else - YOU Know that's what you did. How can you be that kind of person and live with yourself? You can't undo it now. You will literally always be 'that' guy who was so petty and childish that he had to go back and edit something and then lie about it to cover up his own behavior in an internet forum.

Sure - its 'infotainment'. Most 'news' is these days. Hogwash. It's deemed that way because it suits a narrative. For something to be propaganda it must be mistakenly believed to be actual fact by the recpient but as you JUST posted... "The "'general tenor' of the show should then inform a viewer that [Carlson] is not 'stating actual facts' So. The viewer knows it's not fact. Ergo - it CANNOT be propaganda. I'll cancel the therapist then Truth be told i rather already gathered you were rugged enough not to be weeping if i didn't agree 100 percent

Well we've seen that before. I say we bring back 1970's post teenage identity angst and see if we can convince them not to wake anyone over 30

Well now we both konw you're lying. You wrote something i didn't say then you edited it out when you got called on it. And you can bet a bunch of people saw it. Now everyone knows you're a dishonest troll Well done