Pilot's Political Orientation

"James Robinson" wrote in message
...
Joe Young wrote:

Every poll shows the vast majority of the American public apposes
abortion. If that is the case in a democracy, shouldn't
the majority rule?

I'm not sure what polls you are reading, but here is a link that shows
the opposite, i.e. support for legal abortions at about 53 percent, and
opposition at 43 percent. They state this has been the trend for at
least the last decade.

http://abcnews.go.com/sections/us/Da...oll010702.html

This one seems to have some different stats?????........??

http://christianparty.net/abortiongallup.htm

here is a interesting survey

http://www307.pair.com/ejs/plal1/surveys.htm

here is another...all found with a quick google search on abortion poll...

http://www.euthanasia.com/poll.html

Joe Young wrote:

James Robinson wrote:

Joe Young wrote:

Every poll shows the vast majority of the American public apposes
abortion. If that is the case in a democracy, shouldn't
the majority rule?

I'm not sure what polls you are reading, but here is a link that shows
the opposite, i.e. support for legal abortions at about 53 percent, and
opposition at 43 percent. They state this has been the trend for at
least the last decade.

http://abcnews.go.com/sections/us/Da...oll010702.html

This one seems to have some different stats?????........??

http://christianparty.net/abortiongallup.htm

I prefer ABC news as a less biased source than an advocacy group, thank
you.

"James Robinson" wrote in message
...
Joe Young wrote:

James Robinson wrote:

Joe Young wrote:

Every poll shows the vast majority of the American public apposes
abortion. If that is the case in a democracy, shouldn't
the majority rule?

I'm not sure what polls you are reading, but here is a link that shows
the opposite, i.e. support for legal abortions at about 53 percent,
and
opposition at 43 percent. They state this has been the trend for at
least the last decade.

http://abcnews.go.com/sections/us/Da...oll010702.html

This one seems to have some different stats?????........??

http://christianparty.net/abortiongallup.htm

I prefer ABC news as a less biased source than an advocacy group, thank
you.

ABC News is less biased.............. OK you win!

"James Robinson" wrote in message
...

I prefer ABC news as a less biased source than an advocacy
group, thank you.


Less biased, perhaps, but definitely not unbiased.

"James Robinson" wrote in message
...
Joe Young wrote:

James Robinson wrote:

Joe Young wrote:

Every poll shows the vast majority of the American public apposes
abortion. If that is the case in a democracy, shouldn't
the majority rule?

I'm not sure what polls you are reading, but here is a link that shows
the opposite, i.e. support for legal abortions at about 53 percent,
and
opposition at 43 percent. They state this has been the trend for at
least the last decade.

http://abcnews.go.com/sections/us/Da...oll010702.html

This one seems to have some different stats?????........??

http://christianparty.net/abortiongallup.htm

I prefer ABC news as a less biased source than an advocacy group, thank
you.

ABC less biased.....best joke in this thread so far.

James Robinson wrote:
Joe Young wrote:

James Robinson wrote:

Joe Young wrote:

Every poll shows the vast majority of the American public apposes
abortion. If that is the case in a democracy, shouldn't
the majority rule?

I'm not sure what polls you are reading, but here is a link that shows
the opposite, i.e. support for legal abortions at about 53 percent, and
opposition at 43 percent. They state this has been the trend for at
least the last decade.

http://abcnews.go.com/sections/us/Da...oll010702.html

This one seems to have some different stats?????........??

http://christianparty.net/abortiongallup.htm


I prefer ABC news as a less biased source than an advocacy group, thank
you.

Was is ABC or CBS that staged the Chevy pickup truck exploding gas tank?
I don't trust any of the news organizations anymore. Almost every one
has been caught doing something like this when they can't get the real
data to match the outcome they desire to report.


Matt

Matt Whiting wrote:

James Robinson wrote:
Joe Young wrote:

James Robinson wrote:

Joe Young wrote:

Every poll shows the vast majority of the American public apposes
abortion. If that is the case in a democracy, shouldn't
the majority rule?

I'm not sure what polls you are reading, but here is a link that shows
the opposite, i.e. support for legal abortions at about 53 percent, and
opposition at 43 percent. They state this has been the trend for at
least the last decade.

http://abcnews.go.com/sections/us/Da...oll010702.html

This one seems to have some different stats?????........??

http://christianparty.net/abortiongallup.htm


I prefer ABC news as a less biased source than an advocacy group, thank
you.

Was is ABC or CBS that staged the Chevy pickup truck exploding gas tank?

Neither. That was NBC.

I don't trust any of the news organizations anymore. Almost every one
has been caught doing something like this when they can't get the real
data to match the outcome they desire to report.

You just have to be skeptical. At least there is an editorial board,
and they have to answer to the FCC. If you want manipulated data, just
look at any number of sites on internet, which don't have to answer to
anybody.

"James Robinson" wrote in message
...

Was is ABC or CBS that staged the Chevy pickup truck exploding gas tank?

Neither. That was NBC.

I don't trust any of the news organizations anymore. Almost every one
has been caught doing something like this when they can't get the real
data to match the outcome they desire to report.

You just have to be skeptical. At least there is an editorial board,
and they have to answer to the FCC.

They don't to the FCC for the factual content of the reports. Where di you
get that idea?

If you want manipulated data, just
look at any number of sites on internet, which don't have to answer to
anybody.

The ones on the internet answer to the same people as the mainstream
media -- the market they serve, and their credibility is at stake. That
reputation is something that bureaucrats can neither enhance, nor destroy.

They don't to the FCC for the factual content of the reports.

They answer to the FCC in broadcasting for the public good (or something like
that). Broadcasting falsities as true news would go against this and if enough
happens the FCC could get interested.

Jose


--
(for Email, make the obvious changes in my address)

Teacherjh ) wrote:
: They don't to the FCC for the factual content of the reports.
:
: They answer to the FCC in broadcasting for the public good (or something
: like that). Broadcasting falsities as true news would go against this
: and if enough happens the FCC could get interested.
:
: Jose
:

A Florida appellate court ruled that the media can legally lie.
Fox Television's attorneys argued that Fox's right to lie is
protected by Fox's First Ammendment rights:

http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2003/08/269899.shtml
portland imc - 2003.08.16 - Appellate Court Rules Media Can Legally Lie

"Appellate Court Rules Media Can Legally Lie
author: FYI

On February 14, a Florida Appeals court ruled there is absolutely
nothing illegal about lying, concealing or distorting information by a
major press organization.

Appellate Court Rules Media Can Legally Lie.
By Mike Gaddy
Published 02. 28. 03 at 19:31 Sierra Time

On February 14, a Florida Appeals court ruled there is absolutely
nothing illegal about lying, concealing or distorting information by a
major press organization. The court reversed the $425,000 jury verdict
in favor of journalist Jane Akre who charged she was pressured by Fox
Television management and lawyers to air what she knew and documented
to be false information. The ruling basically declares it is
technically not against any law, rule, or regulation to deliberately
lie or distort the news on a television broadcast.

On August 18, 2000, a six-person jury was unanimous in its conclusion
that Akre was indeed fired for threatening to report the station's
pressure to broadcast what jurors decided was "a false, distorted, or
slanted" story about the widespread use of growth hormone in dairy
cows. The court did not dispute the heart of Akre's claim, that Fox
pressured her to broadcast a false story to protect the broadcaster
from having to defend the truth in court, as well as suffer the ire of
irate advertisers.

Fox argued from the first, and failed on three separate occasions, in
front of three different judges, to have the case tossed out on the
grounds there is no hard, fast, and written rule against deliberate
distortion of the news. The attorneys for Fox, owned by media baron
Rupert Murdock, argued the First Amendment gives broadcasters the
right to lie or deliberately distort news reports on the public
airwaves.

In its six-page written decision, the Court of Appeals held that the
Federal Communications Commission position against news distortion is
only a "policy," not a promulgated law, rule, or regulation.
Fox aired a report after the ruling saying it was "totally vindicated"
by the verdict."

The following article gives the story of how corporations came to have
"personhood":

http://www.commondreams.org/views03/0101-07.htm
Now Corporations Claim The "Right To Lie"

--Jerry Leslie
Note: is invalid for email