Voyager was a #1 show on a 6th place network. That's the only reason it survived. Compared to all the other shows Voyager routinely ranked in the 80s out of ~100 shows. It's ratings were 2 million viewers lower than its sibling DS9, and ~10 million viewers lower than its ancestor Next Generation.
As for Enterprise, same deal. It was #2 on a 6th place network. The reason it eventually got canceled was because a new president took-over UPN, and she specifically said she doesn't like sci-fi. So she canceled Enterprise at the end of season 3, but Paramount offered to pay the cost of season 4 to get a full ~80 episodes (easier to sell in reruns), and then that was the end.
BTW that wasn't the first time Paramount did that. When the Next Generation was born, Paramount provided the show's first season free-of-charge in order to get local stations to buy it. It was a gamble but it paid off in the long term (sales of reruns, tapes, DVDs, and merchandise).
Probably the same thing that TNT was thinking when they tried to advertise wrestling on Babylon 5, and vice versa.
They look at the demos and see that WW and SF are both popular with young males, and assume the two types of show complement each other. They don't realize that these are *different* groups of young males - dumb versus smart. Jock vs geek.
This past summer when the TV was lacking worthwhile shows, I acquired "the Year's Best Science Fiction" from amazon.com. There are about 30 editions of this book, each 700-800 pages long, so pleny of material to keep you busy.
If that's not enough subscribe to the magazine "Asimov's Science Fiction" which provides 3-4 fresh stories each month.
I would say it's the opposite since, although they both like to spend, the Democrats spend far, far more.
Back to topic: The FCC's idea of "net neutrality" is not our idea of net neutrality. The FCC would impose all kinds of restrictions such as forbidding bittorrent, forbidding downloads of sex vids, pulling websites w/o due process of law (i.e. as just happened last month), require a license to post a personal website, tax ebay sales, and on and on. At least that's what I've heard - I'm still researching the FCC's exact plan.
I'm also wondering how the FCC can claim authority over the net? - These are private cables owned by private companies. The FCC was empowered by Congress to regulate the PUBLIC airwaves and that's it. It's why HBO and other channels can show nudity/sex - because the FCC has no authority to stop them.
I downloaded Tremors the Weekly Series. It was incredibly stupid but made me laugh. So of course it got canceled by Sci-Fi.:-|
Maybe they could do a remake of Voyagers! which was an educational history show. A bit kiddy but fun.
>>>Eureka? Sanctuary? Those two are decent. The of course they have scare tactics, which I don't like, and ghost hunters, which I loathe.
Eureka's been on since, um, 2004? - it's time is almost done. Sanctuary I find incredible dull and lifeless (like SGU). Ditto most of the other syfy shows except Ghosthunters.
>>>Without MacGyver or the humor, what do you have? Sliders with alien gods
(hurt look). Hey! I liked Sliders. And I liked SG1's exploration of a new world each week (i.e. the first five seasons on Showtime). I like shows that test out new ideas, like the original Trek used to do.
>>>decent ratings for SciFi so any series that isn't a blockbuster will on the chopping block there.
Probably because it's not Sci-Fi anymore, but Syfy. Slang for syfylis?;-) The executives appear to be converting the channel from science fiction to fantasy & horror with new shows that have zero basis in reality (like that Stephen King show, and Amanda Tapping's supernatural-whatever show). Plus the addition of Wrestling to replace what was SciFi Prime/Friday for almost 15 years.
I'm afraid sci-fi is dead on Syfy. Perhaps it's time to start a new "Science and Science Fiction" channel (to borrow the title from Analog) and restore some of those classic shows like "SF Trader" and "Convention Watch" and "Inside Space".
>>>And what the fuck was with the last episode where they just wormholed across time arbitrarily?
Maybe I need to rewatch the episode, but that's not what I saw. If I recall correctly Atlantis turned-on its warp drive and flew across the gap between galaxies, just the same way the Earth ships had done dozens of times (and the Ancient ships did routinely). It was not arbitrary but a well-established fact that it could be done. Neither was it instantaneous, although it was very fast (just a few days).
I can tell you never watched beyond the first few episodes (but I'm just guessing - could be wrong). Yes SGA was pretty "blah" to start but it got better towards the end of the season, and seasons 2,3,4,5 were almost as good as SG1's first five seasons.
I especially liked the concept that the Bad guys were humans that had been bitten by a bug, and the two genes intermingled to create a new species. I also liked learning more about the Ancients, the further development of the replicators (which were an invention of an Ancient scientist), and the exploration of ascension.
SG1 fell into the trap of being a war show, but SGA was free to explore a new idea in each episode (like reading a Short short anthology). Reminded me of the greatness of Star Trek DS9 or the original trek.
Well I agree with you in principle, but not your timing. I LOVED Atlantis, mainly because of quirky characters like Dr. Rodney McKay. The last two seasons of SG1 (the Or'i seasons) were lousy but I enjoyed watch SGA.
And SGU had me on the edge of my seat for the first 10 episodes or so, but then you could tell the story writers ran out of ideas. The ship "deep in space & out of contact" setting didn't work just as it didn't work for Star Trek Voyager.
So yes cancel Stargate SG1 and SGU, but not Atlantis.
>>>having a photo of a teenager one day shy of her eighteenth birthday
The US Supreme Court has ruled that nudity, regardless of age, is not illegal. That's why you can find books filled with naked children and teens in amazon.com, or at Barnes&Noble brick stores. Of course you'll still get arrested for possession of the 17.9-yr-old nude photo, so the local Prosecutor can brag he is "getting tough on crime", but if the judge follows the SCOTUS decision, you'll eventually be let go.
I've never understood the use of this phrase. For me "porn" only applies if there's sex (either with a partner or self). It either is porn or isn't porn. Since the fashion models are clothed, there's no sex. And even in those shots where they are nude, there's still no sex. So the word "porn" doesn't apply.
If I were to apply a word to ads in magazines, et cetera I'd use "suggestive" or "attractive". Not porn; not sex.
BTW I agree with your point about body image and the negative impact on anorexic teens. But "thin" is still preferable overall, if only to avoid overweight-related diseases like clogged arteries, heart attack, or brain stroke. Perhaps if doctors could image the inside of our bodies, and show us the degeneration, we'd all eat a hell of a lot less.
We were discussing the Usenet and Fidonet for sharing text/image files over phone lines (in the event the internet was censored). Hulu/netflix has nothing to do with this topic.
700 MB is still the most common size found on isohunt.com searches. And while SOME may prefer higher-quality 1500 or 3000 MB HDTV rips, I actually prefer the opposite. I look for those "NapisyPL" rips that are 70 or 150 MB, or on ipodnova.com for 250 MB rips, since they can be downloaded in about ten minutes.
Anon. Coward writes: >>>in addition to being one of the dumbest people on the planet, you're also a pedophile
No. That would mean I loved pre-adolescent children and I don't. Ick. Sick. Disgusting. "Ephebophile" is the word you're looking for (i.e. 18-22) (aka college aged) which also happens to be the main age group published by Playboy and other mags*. So to act if their is something wrong with that only displays your own Puritan close-mindedness and nudity phobia.
* * Except the Danish "Seventeen" which is self-descriptive.
Re:"Google, of course, recommends Chrome."
on
Browsing the Body
·
· Score: 0
What's this "You must wait 6 hours to post a second comment" nonsense??? (shrug)
Try this: - Firefox 4 beta - SeaMonkey 2.1 beta - Amiga iBrowse 4 - Opera 11 - Or Mozilla Netscape 10 - (just joking) .
I humbly suggest you adjust your search parameters to include the words "teen" and ("mirror" -or- "dorm sex"). You'll see humans in peak physical condition and better than the Penthouse crap with man-made boobs and fake moans.
What's this "You must wait 6 hours to post a second comment" nonsense???
(shrug). Does this mean jurors can't reference Britannica either? Or Websters Dictionary? It seems kinda silly the jury must be kept ignorant. What if you do not know the meaning of the words you hear in the courtroom, like "hearsay" or "sustained".
No wonder we see Innocent people being sent to jail on flimsy evidence like "he was leaning over the body & breathing into her mouth". (20+ years later DNA evidence proved that guy was not the killer.) Our juries are not informed enough to do a proper job.
700 MB is still the most common size found on isohunt.com searches.
And while SOME like yourself may prefer higher-quality 1500 or 3000 MB HDTV rips, I actually prefer the opposite. I look for those "NapisyPL" rips that are 70 or 150 MB, or on ipodnova.com for 250 MB rips, since they can be downloaded in about ten minutes.
>>>So what exactly is wrong with the way the poll was conducted?
Well let's take the "Is Obama a natural born American" question. The survey-runners assume the answer is "yes" but the REAL answer is "uncertain". Yes they produced a birth certificate, but it's just a piece of paper and easily forged. (In fact I could print one right now showing I was born in Hawaii w/o too much difficulty.)
Wise people who took this survey & answered "uncertain" are assumed by the survey to be idiots. In my mind that alone invalidates the survey because oftentimes the one, best answer is uncertain. See Physics and the Uncertainty Principle (we can know a particle's momentum or position, but not both at the same time).
Oh yes I know. You think I'm dumb. Well my two college degrees in engineering, and 135 IQ, say otherwise.
The other flaw: The survey is based upon 3 cherry-picked questions and ~400 individuals. That is not statistically significant, nor is the same size large enough to extrapolate to the whole nation. We also don't know how these individuals were selected - is it truly a random sample representing all colors, sexes, political views, geographic location??? Doubtful.
That's true. Look how many Leftist-run governments killed during the last hundred years. 60 million by Leftist China. 50 million by Leftist Russia. 20 million by Leftist 1930s/40s Germany. Plus communists or corporatists in Spain, Vietnam, Cambodia.
It adds-up to over 150 million citizens killed by their *own* governments. Of course some of those governments were right-wing conservatives, such as Iran's Church-run Oligarchy, but that still leaves ~140 million killed by Leftist/Progressive politicians desiring to "build a better, brighter society". See the novel 1984.
>>>>>My research shows World Public Opinion is sponsored by the Liberal-leaning, Socialist-loving University of Maryland (the state where 70% of the government is Democrat). >> >>Please defend this claim. y'know with some facts and not personal opinion
Oh c'mon. It's on the "ABOUT US" page of the World Public Opinion website. Not that hard to locate.
And the makeup of the Maryland Legislature is public knowledge. This state is solidly-Democrat. The Republican legislators might as well just stay home, since their voices are drowned-out.
>>>"Buy hospital insurance or... well there is no other choice." ----- OK, I've seen this Libertarian objection to the new Health Care law before, and I have a question about it. What do you consider the viable alternative? >>>
Pay Cash. Most visits, even serious things like inserting a pacemaker or getting a hysterectomy, cost less than a new car (i.e. less than $20,000). Supplement that with: Catastrophic insurance. When you develop a serious illness like cancer that exceeds some minimum (say $50,000) then the company will cover your bills and "save" you from being bankrupted.
As for poor people, I'd simply use Welfare to pay their bills. Or some other safety net. We don't need to Force everyone into a government-run program. Just the bottom ~5% that are too poor to help themselves. A net. The rest of us would not need the net, so we would receive no government assistance. (Likewise I'd convert SS to a needs-based system which excludes the rich or well-off.) .
>>>Given the three facts/assumptions above, what is the better option than compulsory health insurance?
Freedom of Choice is preferable to being treated like a child too dumb to make his/her own decisions. What's next? They force me to eat nothing but vegetables instead of hamburgers??? C'mon. I had a mommy & daddy and then I grew-up. I don't need Congressmen acting like a replacement parent. ----- So FREEDOM is the better option PLUS the government-safety net I outlined above (welfare, medicare, food stamps, and so on) to help the bottom 5%.
And here's what I observed: World Public Opinion is sponsored by the Liberal-leaning, socialist-loving University of Maryland (the state where 70% of the government is Democrat)(and 90% of professors are too). So the survey bashing Libertarian-leaning FOX viewers is as unsurprising as a Microsoft-funded survey showing Google Chrome is insecure. BOTH surveys are meaningless bullshit, not worth the paper they are printed on.
Senator Paul is correct. If I open a store in my home's spare room, the 9th and 10th Amendments of the Constitution reserve to me the right to not serve black people. Or gay people. Or those that wear glasses. Or people who like George Duh Bush. That's what the word "freedom" means - to associate (or not) with whatever persons you wish. To force me to deal with persons I don't like, is equivalent to forcing me to eat shit that I don't like. The Constitution does not give the US Congress that power.
The proper procedure was to AMEND CONSTITUTIONAL LAW to give Congress the power. Just as was done to outlaw alcohol and forbade slavery. That is the only legal method. Until that happens, I am under no requirement to sell my goods from my house to ____ persons if I do not want to.
>>>we must conclude that MSNBC is more factual (since their viewers know more facts). This would disprove your claim of equal bias.
Whatever.
My research shows World Public Opinion is sponsored by the Liberal-leaning, Socialist-loving University of Maryland (the state where 70% of the government is Democrat)(and ditto the professors). So the survey bashing FOX viewers is as unsurprising as a Microsoft-funded survey showing Google Chrome is insecure. BOTH are meaningless bullshit.
At the end of the day FOX is still watched by 4 times as many viewers as MSNBC - why? Because it is close to where most Middle Americans lie in their views. Most americans DON'T want government ordering them around like a Jew in 1935 Germany. (Yeah I know - they are soooo dumb to think that way.)
Slashdot Mirror
Precisely.
Voyager was a #1 show on a 6th place network. That's the only reason it survived. Compared to all the other shows Voyager routinely ranked in the 80s out of ~100 shows. It's ratings were 2 million viewers lower than its sibling DS9, and ~10 million viewers lower than its ancestor Next Generation.
As for Enterprise, same deal. It was #2 on a 6th place network. The reason it eventually got canceled was because a new president took-over UPN, and she specifically said she doesn't like sci-fi. So she canceled Enterprise at the end of season 3, but Paramount offered to pay the cost of season 4 to get a full ~80 episodes (easier to sell in reruns), and then that was the end.
BTW that wasn't the first time Paramount did that. When the Next Generation was born, Paramount provided the show's first season free-of-charge in order to get local stations to buy it. It was a gamble but it paid off in the long term (sales of reruns, tapes, DVDs, and merchandise).
Probably the same thing that TNT was thinking when they tried to advertise wrestling on Babylon 5, and vice versa.
They look at the demos and see that WW and SF are both popular with young males, and assume the two types of show complement each other. They don't realize that these are *different* groups of young males - dumb versus smart. Jock vs geek.
>>>On what planet do Democrats like to spend "far far more"?
The top 5 most expensive items on the budget:
- Social Security
- Medicare
- Medicaid
- Welfare
- Food Stamps
The top 5 were inventions of the Democrats, and that's why I call them "bigger spenders" than the Republicans.
This past summer when the TV was lacking worthwhile shows, I acquired "the Year's Best Science Fiction" from amazon.com. There are about 30 editions of this book, each 700-800 pages long, so pleny of material to keep you busy.
If that's not enough subscribe to the magazine "Asimov's Science Fiction" which provides 3-4 fresh stories each month.
I would say it's the opposite since, although they both like to spend, the Democrats spend far, far more.
Back to topic: The FCC's idea of "net neutrality" is not our idea of net neutrality. The FCC would impose all kinds of restrictions such as forbidding bittorrent, forbidding downloads of sex vids, pulling websites w/o due process of law (i.e. as just happened last month), require a license to post a personal website, tax ebay sales, and on and on. At least that's what I've heard - I'm still researching the FCC's exact plan.
I'm also wondering how the FCC can claim authority over the net?
- These are private cables owned by private companies. The FCC was
empowered by Congress to regulate the PUBLIC airwaves and that's it.
It's why HBO and other channels can show nudity/sex - because the FCC has no authority to stop them.
I downloaded Tremors the Weekly Series. It was incredibly stupid but made me laugh. So of course it got canceled by Sci-Fi. :-|
Maybe they could do a remake of Voyagers! which was an educational history show. A bit kiddy but fun.
>>>Eureka? Sanctuary? Those two are decent. The of course they have scare tactics, which I don't like, and ghost hunters, which I loathe.
Eureka's been on since, um, 2004? - it's time is almost done.
Sanctuary I find incredible dull and lifeless (like SGU).
Ditto most of the other syfy shows except Ghosthunters.
>>>Without MacGyver or the humor, what do you have? Sliders with alien gods
(hurt look). Hey! I liked Sliders. And I liked SG1's exploration of a new world each week (i.e. the first five seasons on Showtime). I like shows that test out new ideas, like the original Trek used to do.
>>>decent ratings for SciFi so any series that isn't a blockbuster will on the chopping block there.
Probably because it's not Sci-Fi anymore, but Syfy. Slang for syfylis? ;-) The executives appear to be converting the channel from science fiction to fantasy & horror with new shows that have zero basis in reality (like that Stephen King show, and Amanda Tapping's supernatural-whatever show). Plus the addition of Wrestling to replace what was SciFi Prime/Friday for almost 15 years.
I'm afraid sci-fi is dead on Syfy. Perhaps it's time to start a new "Science and Science Fiction" channel (to borrow the title from Analog) and restore some of those classic shows like "SF Trader" and "Convention Watch" and "Inside Space".
>>>And what the fuck was with the last episode where they just wormholed across time arbitrarily?
Maybe I need to rewatch the episode, but that's not what I saw. If I recall correctly Atlantis turned-on its warp drive and flew across the gap between galaxies, just the same way the Earth ships had done dozens of times (and the Ancient ships did routinely). It was not arbitrary but a well-established fact that it could be done. Neither was it instantaneous, although it was very fast (just a few days).
I can tell you never watched beyond the first few episodes (but I'm just guessing - could be wrong). Yes SGA was pretty "blah" to start but it got better towards the end of the season, and seasons 2,3,4,5 were almost as good as SG1's first five seasons.
I especially liked the concept that the Bad guys were humans that had been bitten by a bug, and the two genes intermingled to create a new species. I also liked learning more about the Ancients, the further development of the replicators (which were an invention of an Ancient scientist), and the exploration of ascension.
SG1 fell into the trap of being a war show, but SGA was free to explore a new idea in each episode (like reading a Short short anthology). Reminded me of the greatness of Star Trek DS9 or the original trek.
Well I agree with you in principle, but not your timing. I LOVED Atlantis, mainly because of quirky characters like Dr. Rodney McKay. The last two seasons of SG1 (the Or'i seasons) were lousy but I enjoyed watch SGA.
And SGU had me on the edge of my seat for the first 10 episodes or so, but then you could tell the story writers ran out of ideas. The ship "deep in space & out of contact" setting didn't work just as it didn't work for Star Trek Voyager.
So yes cancel Stargate SG1 and SGU, but not Atlantis.
>>>having a photo of a teenager one day shy of her eighteenth birthday
The US Supreme Court has ruled that nudity, regardless of age, is not illegal. That's why you can find books filled with naked children and teens in amazon.com, or at Barnes&Noble brick stores. Of course you'll still get arrested for possession of the 17.9-yr-old nude photo, so the local Prosecutor can brag he is "getting tough on crime", but if the judge follows the SCOTUS decision, you'll eventually be let go.
>>>"soft porn" of the fashion industry
I've never understood the use of this phrase. For me "porn" only applies if there's sex (either with a partner or self). It either is porn or isn't porn. Since the fashion models are clothed, there's no sex. And even in those shots where they are nude, there's still no sex. So the word "porn" doesn't apply.
If I were to apply a word to ads in magazines, et cetera I'd use "suggestive" or "attractive". Not porn; not sex.
BTW I agree with your point about body image and the negative impact on anorexic teens. But "thin" is still preferable overall, if only to avoid overweight-related diseases like clogged arteries, heart attack, or brain stroke. Perhaps if doctors could image the inside of our bodies, and show us the degeneration, we'd all eat a hell of a lot less.
C64_love (was banned for twenty hours)
We were discussing the Usenet and Fidonet for sharing text/image files over phone lines (in the event the internet was censored). Hulu/netflix has nothing to do with this topic.
700 MB is still the most common size found on isohunt.com searches. And while SOME may prefer higher-quality 1500 or 3000 MB HDTV rips, I actually prefer the opposite. I look for those "NapisyPL" rips that are 70 or 150 MB, or on ipodnova.com for 250 MB rips, since they can be downloaded in about ten minutes.
-C64_love (banned from posting for one day)
Anon. Coward writes:
>>>in addition to being one of the dumbest people on the planet, you're also a pedophile
No. That would mean I loved pre-adolescent children and I don't. Ick. Sick. Disgusting. "Ephebophile" is the word you're looking for (i.e. 18-22) (aka college aged) which also happens to be the main age group published by Playboy and other mags*. So to act if their is something wrong with that only displays your own Puritan close-mindedness and nudity phobia.
*
* Except the Danish "Seventeen" which is self-descriptive.
What's this "You must wait 6 hours to post a second comment" nonsense??? (shrug)
Try this:
- Firefox 4 beta
- SeaMonkey 2.1 beta
- Amiga iBrowse 4
- Opera 11
- Or Mozilla Netscape 10 - (just joking)
.
-C64_love (banned from posting for one day)
Out of shape???
I humbly suggest you adjust your search parameters to include the words "teen" and ("mirror" -or- "dorm sex"). You'll see humans in peak physical condition and better than the Penthouse crap with man-made boobs and fake moans.
What's this "You must wait 6 hours to post a second comment" nonsense???
(shrug). Does this mean jurors can't reference Britannica either? Or Websters Dictionary? It seems kinda silly the jury must be kept ignorant. What if you do not know the meaning of the words you hear in the courtroom, like "hearsay" or "sustained".
No wonder we see Innocent people being sent to jail on flimsy evidence like "he was leaning over the body & breathing into her mouth". (20+ years later DNA evidence proved that guy was not the killer.) Our juries are not informed enough to do a proper job.
700 MB is still the most common size found on isohunt.com searches.
And while SOME like yourself may prefer higher-quality 1500 or 3000 MB HDTV rips, I actually prefer the opposite. I look for those "NapisyPL" rips that are 70 or 150 MB, or on ipodnova.com for 250 MB rips, since they can be downloaded in about ten minutes.
-C64_love (banned from posting for one day)
>>>So what exactly is wrong with the way the poll was conducted?
Well let's take the "Is Obama a natural born American" question. The survey-runners assume the answer is "yes" but the REAL answer is "uncertain". Yes they produced a birth certificate, but it's just a piece of paper and easily forged. (In fact I could print one right now showing I was born in Hawaii w/o too much difficulty.)
Wise people who took this survey & answered "uncertain" are assumed by the survey to be idiots. In my mind that alone invalidates the survey because oftentimes the one, best answer is uncertain. See Physics and the Uncertainty Principle (we can know a particle's momentum or position, but not both at the same time).
Oh yes I know. You think I'm dumb. Well my two college degrees in engineering, and 135 IQ, say otherwise.
The other flaw: The survey is based upon 3 cherry-picked questions and ~400 individuals. That is not statistically significant, nor is the same size large enough to extrapolate to the whole nation. We also don't know how these individuals were selected - is it truly a random sample representing all colors, sexes, political views, geographic location??? Doubtful.
>>>Reality has a decidedly left-leaning bias.
That's true. Look how many Leftist-run governments killed during the last hundred years. 60 million by Leftist China. 50 million by Leftist Russia. 20 million by Leftist 1930s/40s Germany. Plus communists or corporatists in Spain, Vietnam, Cambodia.
It adds-up to over 150 million citizens killed by their *own* governments. Of course some of those governments were right-wing conservatives, such as Iran's Church-run Oligarchy, but that still leaves ~140 million killed by Leftist/Progressive politicians desiring to "build a better, brighter society". See the novel 1984.
>>>>>My research shows World Public Opinion is sponsored by the Liberal-leaning, Socialist-loving University of Maryland (the state where 70% of the government is Democrat).
>>
>>Please defend this claim. y'know with some facts and not personal opinion
Oh c'mon.
It's on the "ABOUT US" page of the
World Public Opinion website. Not that hard to locate.
And the makeup of the Maryland Legislature is public knowledge. This state is solidly-Democrat. The Republican legislators might as well just stay home, since their voices are drowned-out.
>>>"Buy hospital insurance or... well there is no other choice." ----- OK, I've seen this Libertarian objection to the new Health Care law before, and I have a question about it. What do you consider the viable alternative?
>>>
Pay Cash. Most visits, even serious things like inserting a pacemaker or getting a hysterectomy, cost less than a new car (i.e. less than $20,000). Supplement that with: Catastrophic insurance. When you develop a serious illness like cancer that exceeds some minimum (say $50,000) then the company will cover your bills and "save" you from being bankrupted.
As for poor people, I'd simply use Welfare to pay their bills. Or some other safety net. We don't need to Force everyone into a government-run program. Just the bottom ~5% that are too poor to help themselves. A net. The rest of us would not need the net, so we would receive no government assistance. (Likewise I'd convert SS to a needs-based system which excludes the rich or well-off.)
.
>>>Given the three facts/assumptions above, what is the better option than compulsory health insurance?
Freedom of Choice is preferable to being treated like a child too dumb to make his/her own decisions. What's next? They force me to eat nothing but vegetables instead of hamburgers??? C'mon. I had a mommy & daddy and then I grew-up. I don't need Congressmen acting like a replacement parent. ----- So FREEDOM is the better option PLUS the government-safety net I outlined above (welfare, medicare, food stamps, and so on) to help the bottom 5%.
Good observation.
And here's what I observed: World Public Opinion is sponsored by the Liberal-leaning, socialist-loving University of Maryland (the state where 70% of the government is Democrat)(and 90% of professors are too). So the survey bashing Libertarian-leaning FOX viewers is as unsurprising as a Microsoft-funded survey showing Google Chrome is insecure. BOTH surveys are meaningless bullshit, not worth the paper they are printed on.
Senator Paul is correct. If I open a store in my home's spare room, the 9th and 10th Amendments of the Constitution reserve to me the right to not serve black people. Or gay people. Or those that wear glasses. Or people who like George Duh Bush. That's what the word "freedom" means - to associate (or not) with whatever persons you wish.
To force me to deal with persons I don't like, is equivalent to forcing me to eat shit that I don't like. The Constitution does not give the US Congress that power.
The proper procedure was to AMEND CONSTITUTIONAL LAW to give Congress the power. Just as was done to outlaw alcohol and forbade slavery. That is the only legal method. Until that happens, I am under no requirement to sell my goods from my house to ____ persons if I do not want to.
>>>we must conclude that MSNBC is more factual (since their viewers know more facts). This would disprove your claim of equal bias.
Whatever.
My research shows World Public Opinion is sponsored by the Liberal-leaning, Socialist-loving University of Maryland (the state where 70% of the government is Democrat)(and ditto the professors). So the survey bashing FOX viewers is as unsurprising as a Microsoft-funded survey showing Google Chrome is insecure. BOTH are meaningless bullshit.
At the end of the day FOX is still watched by 4 times as many viewers as MSNBC - why? Because it is close to where most Middle Americans lie in their views. Most americans DON'T want government ordering them around like a Jew in 1935 Germany. (Yeah I know - they are soooo dumb to think that way.)