Holy turdblossum Batman !

Your commander in chief of the armed forces
of the united states of america:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/spl/h...try/html/5.stm

Golly, gee wiz, jeepers creepers, lordy lordy lordy.

"Gomer Pyle" wrote ...
Golly, gee wiz, jeepers creepers, lordy lordy lordy.

Is there some point to this? You could take a similar picture
of anyone saying anything about anyone. Is this what passes
for "news" on the Beeb nowadays? My profound sympathies.

Back to the pumps Gomer, I think I heard the ding ding.
(oh, and plonk too.)

Anything from the BBC is going to be bull****. Funny how far people have to
go to find this ****.
"Gomer Pyle" wrote in message
...
Your commander in chief of the armed forces
of the united states of america:


http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/spl/h...try/html/5.stm

Golly, gee wiz, jeepers creepers, lordy lordy lordy.

Jona Vark wrote:
Anything from the BBC is going to be bull****.

Only according to Fox News, the Washington Times,
and Newsmax. I'll say this much: A typical
right-wingers sources are incredible.

Jona Vark wrote:
Anything from the BBC is going to be bull****. Funny how far people have to
go to find this ****.

You only had to click through some of the other pictures to see that a
full range of opinions were represented. Is that such an alien
concept? Sorry, I'll let you get back to Fox...

Alex

concept? Sorry, I'll let you get back to Fox...

Alex


Fair and balanced . . .

"Alex Bird" wrote in message
oups.com...
Jona Vark wrote:
Anything from the BBC is going to be bull****. Funny how far people have
to
go to find this ****.

You only had to click through some of the other pictures to see that a
full range of opinions were represented. Is that such an alien
concept? Sorry, I'll let you get back to Fox...

Alex

Thanks Alex. Of course you are going to stick up for your Country's liberal
/ government version of PBS/NPR. I expect that. Opinions... just that.

Jona Vark wrote:

Thanks Alex. Of course you are going to stick up for your Country's liberal
/ government version of PBS/NPR. I expect that. Opinions... just that.

Sorry Jona, in fact the current 'liberal' government has the worst
relationship with the BBC of any in recent history.

Of course it's practically impossible to get total impartiality, but
the bbc is paid fairly directly by the people, and is answerable to the
British people.

Alex

"Alex Bird" wrote in message
oups.com...
Jona Vark wrote:

Thanks Alex. Of course you are going to stick up for your Country's
liberal
/ government version of PBS/NPR. I expect that. Opinions... just that.

Sorry Jona, in fact the current 'liberal' government has the worst
relationship with the BBC of any in recent history.

Kudos to them. I meant "liberal like NPR/PBS" not liberal government.



Of course it's practically impossible to get total impartiality,

true. Sad but true.

but
the bbc is paid fairly directly by the people, and is answerable to the
British people.

As are some of our publicly funded media. But they lean only one way and
resist any change or call for fairness.


Alex

Jona Vark" wrote:
"Alex Bird" wrote in message
roups.com...
Of course it's practically impossible to get total impartiality,

true. Sad but true.

but
the bbc is paid fairly directly by the people, and is answerable to the
British people.

As are some of our publicly funded media.

Actually not. Only about 2% of NPR finances come from the government
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NPR
NPR makes some of its funding information public. According to the NPR
Ombudsman, currently NPR makes just over half of its money from the
fees it charges member stations to receive programming. About 2% of
NPR's funding comes from bidding to government grants and programs
(chiefly the Corporation for Public Broadcasting); the remainder
comes from member station dues, foundation grants, and corporate
underwriting.

Over the years, the portion of the total NPR budget that comes from
government has been decreasing. During the 1970s and early 1980s, the
majority of NPR funding came from the government. Steps were being
taken during the 1980s to completely wean NPR from government
support, but a major funding crisis in 1983, which almost led to the
demise of the network, brought about more rapid shifts in NPR's
funding setup. More money to fund the NPR network was raised from
listeners, charitable foundations and corporations, and less from the
government.

In 2003 the widow of the founder of McDonalds left $200 million to
NPR, which is about two years of its budget. You thus could say that
the last 2 years of NPR were NOT publicly funded but indirectly paid
for by McDonalds, and be more accurate than saying that NPR is "paid
fairly directly by the people".

But they lean only one way and resist any change or call for fairness.

Actually, I would observe that any effort to be "balanced" or "fair"
cannot help but be perceived as "liberal". Toleration of dissenting
views is not a hallmark of the "right" so allowing any consideration
of views inimitable to theirs is inherently a "liberal tilt".

Independent moderates like myself get castigated by the left at times,
but face constant derision from the right for being less than true
believers. The extreme right lumps us in the middle in with
"liberals" because we are insufficiently extreme. This tells me that
their idea of "balance" is 90% their views and token mention of less
extreme positions.

lojbab
--
lojbab
Bob LeChevalier, Founder, The Logical Language Group
(Opinions are my own; I do not speak for the organization.)
Artificial language Loglan/Lojban: http://www.lojban.org