They want to believe. I have an acquaintance, the husband of a friend of my Mom’s. He constantly sends me the ridiculous Obama BS (I don’t think he knows how to get me off of his email list.) When I send him Snopes articles showing that it isn’t true, he only comments “It just happens to agree with how I feel, whether it’s true or not.” He’s a retired ENGINEER of all things.

Chuck Norris Facts; Are they True?

LMAO whaaaat the fuck?

Well I can’t answer the question, because…why indeed? I think it has to do with Fox being pretty damn biased, but it leans towards a mentality or a school of thought that I would suppose many people are subscribed to. So, they stick with it? Aren’t there other, more legitimate channels out there that conservatives can check out? I mean I always thought Fox was pretty much a joke, but being liberal, I suppose I would, haha.

But that list was pretty funny lol. So…how often do you think about touching people’s private parts?

Because some people will believe anything they see on TV or on the Net. I once watched two women in a screening of “JFK” and appeared to believe everything they were watching. This, despite the fact that the Oliver Stone script was, by his own admission, a patchwork of facts, rumors, conspiracy theories, wishful thinking, heightened drama for effect, and pure ol’ BS.

Because to see all their fear-based prejudices, hatreds, and delusions played out in the media gives them confirmation that they are real. And they need this input daily, hourly, constantly, in order to sustain their mindsets in a world that blatantly proves them false at every turn.

@Espiritus_Corvus All that, plus female broadcasters with big titties.

Oooooo. Good Answer @Espiritus_Corvus.

I’m not sure they really believe it but it reinforces a skewed view of the world which some find comforting.

They beleive it because us Lib-tard Socialist Facist gay-loving baby-killing welfare bums don’t; that right there proves that it must be true.

See, they are contrarian. They supported background checks when Reagan and Bush wanted them, but opposed them the instant Democrats supported them. Romneycare was great but Obamacare is unconstitutional, despite both being the same damn thing.

Long story short, anything that a Democrat believes must be false. Anything they support must be bad. Since Fox News reports a totally different version of reality, and supports things that Democrats don’t, they must be the best.

It’s like junk food. You don’t have to do any research, read any labels or pay attention to the facts. You just inhale it and it tastes good. In a sense, it’s easy. And they spoon feed it to you, so you don’t even have to get up. Plus, it’s always more fun for people when there’s an us against them mentality.

Yeah…the same people who red Enquirer magazine and BELIEVE it. Did you know the Obamas are getting DIVORCED?!! And there is going to be a terrible custody battle over the kids.

Confirmation bias

I honestly don’t know. A few old friends from the past that are now “friends” of Facebook occasionally post links to Fox news reports. Most, if not all of them, claim to be Christian. All graduated from high school and almost all from college. The motive behind posting some of these articles is beyond me.

It’s one thing to support their stance on a particular topic with a news link. When they don’t confirm the supposed facts, it just comes across as opinionated sensationalism. What really scares me is how many people end up “liking” the post.

I don’t think that many people actually believe much of any one news source. There’s kooks in all parties.

I don’t believe it but I like The Daily Show’s gently ribbing… Fox news is creating content for the world’s comedians.

The last time that I’ve watched Faux News was back during the height of the Iraq conflict about 7 or 8 years ago. They showed an injured Iraqi child who had lost both legs during the conflict, and they showed the girl receiving medical care at an American hospital. What angered me about that scenerio was the fact that Faux tried to play it off as part of the good side of the war that other news stations refused to cover. I washed my hands clean of Faux since then, but I’ve heard from others that the news station became more liberal/moderate and balanced since then. Obviously it (faux) didn’t or I suppose you wouldn’t have wrote this question then, lol.

@Dutchess_III “They want to believe it.” Profound. Confirmation bias, just as @janbb says. Thanks.

@Symbeline You touched on the confirmation bias issue as well. And yeah, half the reason I asked this question is some of their lies are truly funny.

@Pachyderm_In_The_Room Good point, ridiculous though it may seem. Apparently the mom of the Boston Bombers began to get radicalized after 9/11 when she ran across a 9/11 Truther conspiracy theory website. She told a young woman that recently recounted the discussion that she knew the accusation of Bush complicity to frame Muslims were true, because it was on the Internet. One has to wonder how someone can be that stupid and remember to breathe.

@Espiritus_Corvus Great answer. They are pulling the temple walls down on their own heads, sewing so much dissension and hate that it threatens the very fabric of democracy in America, but who cares about next year when this quarter’s profits are up?

@Symbeline I’m an ass man myself, but Fox has more than its share of big asses on the air.-)

@flutherother One more vote for confirmation bias.

@jerv Sadly accurate. Great answer.

@Kardamom Propaganda is also like junk food in that long-term consumption of it kills.

@Dutchess_III True the Enquirer’s on about the same veracity level, it just isn’t executing a political agenda to deceive.

@Pied_Pfeffer Christians for lies. Interesting.

@KNOWITALL Ah, there is the implied “they’re all the same” trope. I knew that despite the last two paragraphs of the question details soundly debunking that claim, it would be made anyway. To really believe that all news media are the same, you must claim that the news agencies in North Korea, Communist China, and Assad’s Syria are just as interested in the truth, and report just as accurately as the BBC, the Associated Press and Reuters. You must assert that Hitler’s propaganda mill was as truthful as our news media reporting WWII. Do you really believe that the North Koreans are just as truthful in their news coverage as NBC news is? How about political leaders? Were Hitler and Gandhi just alike? How about religious leaders. Do you believe Anton LaVey, founder of the Church of Satan, is exactly like Jesus? I suspect you are only married to false equivalency when it serves the purposes of your confirmation bias.

@talljasperman Excellent point. John Stewart would be devastated if Faux “News” actually started broadcasting honest news coverage.

@Paradox25 Right. Wonderful that we were treating a little girl whose legs we blew off in a war we had no earthly reason to fight. Oh, and too bad about the 100,000 plus civilians we killed, and the sectarian mess we left behind with violence and bombings on the upswing now. It’s all just collateral damage that’s unfortunate, but required to get top cable news ratings and ALL THAT MONEY!

HUh? is there such a person? .I have never met nor heard of anybody that believed fox news.

@trailsillustrated Being down under, you don’t have a chance to live with people that quote the talking heads on FOX News like the are getting the info “on high”.
The “Old South” is still alive and well. Some local politicians that are open about being “Tea Party” members and are trying to go back to 50’s . . . the 1850’s with King Cotton and Tobacco.
They also are trying to set up a state religion in North Carolina ( Southern Baptist ) and secede from the United States of America ( the second largest payroll after the NC state is US government at Army, Air Force, Marines and Federal agencies. )

@ETpro I think you misunderstood, since I never said all news sources were the same. I said that I don’t know anyone who uses only ONE news source.

No apologies necessary, thank you.

@trailsillustrated Yeah, all jokes aside, I do know one person that takes it seriously, and it’s the only news source he trusts. :/

@trailsillustrated What @Tropical_Willie says is quite true.

@KNOWITALL You said “I don’t think that many people actually believe much of any one news source. There’s kooks in all parties.”

First, there are a large number of people in the US who get all their “news” from sources such as Fox, Drudge, Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh and Michael Savage, to name a few.

And while it’s true that there are “kooks in all parties” it’s not even remotely close to true that the concentration is “fair and balances” which just hanging the statement out there implies. It was that implication I zinged you for. It is an implied false equivalency.

I don’t know anyone, personally, who watches Fox News (let alone believes that garbage). I think people must believe in it for much of the reasons already listed. Mainly, confirmation bias.

Stupid Stephen Harper is trying to get Fox News up here, in Canada – I think they want to call it Sun North or Fox North. There are thousands who have petitioned against it.
Since Harper is having such a difficult time with that, he’s now trying his usual back room deals… in getting more government control over our main news source, CBC. So far, over 70K have signed to stop that.

I don’t understand how a company can spew out so much garbage and not be held accountable for it. Similar to tabloids…why is this junk allowed to exist?

@Plucky its nice to know that there is still some democracy up there. We (U.S.) began losing our democracy years ago, when we were suckered into electing Reagan as president. We now have a manifesto called “the Patriot Act” which effectively turned us into a police state run by corporate interests. Fox was given free reign while progressive and liberal new organizations are supported by viewer subscriptions..

@Plucky Fight the Fox North invasion with all you can muster. It’s a corrosive influence on democracy—a pure tool of corporatism.

@Ron_C Amen to that.

Here’s a parody of Fox and Friends, and even it is more fact-based than Fox “News”.

Found this article. Enjoy!

@ETpro I get it. Like I’ve been trying to explain we can’t generalize, even about Republicans, because it makes those generalizing look like idiots.

I don’t bomb abortion clinics.
I don’t tell my pregnant sisters they can’t get abortions.
I don’t go to church and hate LGBT’s.
I don’t watch Fox News.
I don’t believe Obama is a muslim who has a falsified birth certificate.
I don’t believe the US should police the entire world.
I don’t believe all immigrants should be immediately deported.

Hmmm, if Democrats would agree to some reforms and reign in some talking heads of their own, I may even vote differently next time. If we stop the party bickering, we actually have a lot of the same ideals, which is success for America and each other.

@KNOWITALL Troo dat. Sometimes I think politics and their ideals merely exist to maintain man’s confrontational nature.

This article from Forbes Magazine found within the article posted above by @Dutchess_III is quite interesting considering FOX News is the leading cable news channel. Poor, poor America. So terribly misinformed. It’s not surprising that readers of the NY Times and listeners of NPR are better informed than FOX viewers in recent studies, but it is surprising to me that readers of USA Today and people who state they don’t watch any news at all are also better informed. This in a country that is raising a generation that is number one in self-esteem yet is listed as number 17 globally in overall academic achievement according to the OECD and the Pearson Report. Researchers looked at data for 49 developed countries. American students ranked 25th in math, 17th in science and 14th in reading.

So, we have a cable news agency with about twice the market share of it’s competitors that misinforms it’s viewers to the extent that they are better off not watching any news at all—viewers who increasingly have the greatest self-esteem in the world, yet a knowledge base ranking them in the middle and lower third of their economic peers.

Well, at least we’re number one in something, even if it is self-delusion.

@KNOWITALL Such are the problems of “Guilt by association”. It would be a different matter if sane, rational Conservatives would do more to distance themselves from their radical brethren, but as it stands, there appears to be enough complicity that it’s easy to assume agreement.
Note that even our Democrats are generally rather conservative compared to even the Conservative parties of many other nations. And so long as American Conservatives get more radical, their counterparts will move closer to what much of Europe consider “Moderate”.

@jerv What would you have us do to distinguish ourselves? Make t-shirts?

My fb page (as some jellies know) specifically states my views on SSM, I get involved locally (recently asked to join Straights for Gay Equality), and state my views to anyone that will listen. People who know me well, know where I stand, and know I would love to argue SSM or LGBT/ Christianity any time.

These are just a few of the issues involved, I am Pro-Life and Anti-abortion for me personally. I do support our Commander In Chief (regardless of party) and our military personnel (which doesn’t mean I support every action). Shouldn’t be each be judged on our own merits?

If I had to name one thing about fluther that irritates me, it’s that so many here lump each other into boxes, and it’s not necessary. Get to know ME, and I’ll take the time to get to know YOU, regardless of party affiliation. That’s the key to understanding, communication.

@KNOWITALL Well, that is a whole other discussion. Suffice it to say, if rational Conservatives cannot regain control of the Republican party, then it’s either split the party or let things get worse than they already are.

Fluther is a small snapshot of society; why wouldn’t we be as polarized as the rest of society is? As prone to snap judgments and labeling? We’re still people…

@Jerv Yes a snapshot of society, my point exactly. I think people like me are getting tired of it and see the problem.

@KNOWITALL If you hold all those views, which I fully agree with and applaud you for supporting, why do you support a party that’s increasingly diametrically to what you believe?

@ETpro I think I can venture a guess actually.

There are many on that side of the fence who still don’t believe that the GOP has changed. They think it’s the same old “smaller government is better government” party it was 50 years ago when, in fact, it isn’t even the same party it was when Reagan was in office. They stay out of habit.

Then there are those who are worried that if they don’t embrace their radical brethren in partisan unity, the Democrats will win through divide-and-conquer, so splitting the party is not an option in their minds. There are some who are realizing that that will sink them all, radicals and moderates alike, but those seem to be a minority thus far. They stay out of fear.

Lastly, there are those who are entrenched in two-party thinking, and since their position s are slightly closer to the GOP than the Democrats, they vote for the bat-shit brigade even if they have to hold their nose to do so.

Now, @KNOWITALL, am I even close?

@jerv #3 is correct for me. All govt is to support the people and neither party can seem to get it right. Greed wins.

@KNOWITALL That Greed wins statement is the Gospel truth all too often. And the SCOTUS’ Citizens United debacle certainly didn’t help.

@KNOWITALL I am delighted to have you in the Collective and to be challenged by your thinking. I appreciate your staying here and being involved.

I don’t know why Fox and other right wing groups start their reckoning with Reagan. That old dead president put this country on the road that we are now traveling. That clown spent so much on unnecessary defense projects that the Soviet Union went bankrupt catching up.
He raised taxes, killed unions (especially air controllers) and supported death squads in South America. Additionally, he made a deal with Iran to release the hostages after he was elected president.

Considering his spending, government expansion, and multiple concealed wars, today’s Tea Party would never have elected him.

So as the country sinks towards medieval politics, Fox news leads the way.

@ETpro Viva La revolution! :)

@janbb I appreciate that, doll, it’s not always easy being a liberal Republican these days…lol, let alone Christian at that.

@Ron_C Let us not forget that Reagan supported gun control….

@jerv I don’t remember that part. I quit the Republican party when Reagan was nominated. The convention was disgusting all old white men, women only in supporting positions and a lot of coded talk that told black people to walk the line designated by the party. I went to the court house the next day and changed my party.

@Ron_C Wow!! You have to change it at the court house? We just ask for the Democratic or Republican ballot when we vote.

Remember the Brady bill? Reagan wholeheartedly supported it.

@KNOWITALL Said in humor, I am sure, but that may be prophetic.

moar like Faux Nooz amirite

@Symbeline Let’s not use the confusing word, “right” but rather the more precise “correct”.

sorry

More like AssNews, correct yea?

^^ Yea!

@ETpro Like I said before, I’m reading Thomas Jefferson and revolution I don’t think our forefathers would have taken all this peacefully.

@KNOWITALL. The extremist Republicans don’t want to. I’m sure you’ve heard the talk of “Second Amendment solutions” to the ‘problem’ of our country being taken over by a Muslim and his bleeding heart disciples, right? True it’s a small minority, but enough to show that some are considering armed revolution.

@jerv Yeah, like all the same small group of people that were saying Obama would be assasinated in his first term? Idiots. I hate scare tactics and posing, regardless of who’s doing it, and both parties do.

Armed revolution is part of our history and I’m sure it will happen again. The further the government gets from what the people want, the more likely revolution is.

What’s interesting is that the government and some Democrats can’t understand why gun ownership is such a personal thing to a lot of us. Look at our government, look at the parties in-fighting constantly, Obamacare and the penalties for 2014, look at the factions all over the world that want us (the US) to fail- all of this and you want to restrict gun ownership NOW?! It’s like it’s coming from all sides honestly and now is not the time to coerce us give up more of our rights.

@KNOWITALL You mean Romneycare:Expanded Edition, and gun control legislation that had Republican support until the Democrats made it a bipartisan effort? Honestly, I wonder how much of the platforms of both parties is based solely on spitefully opposing the other party rather than what is best for our nation.

Unfortunately, one side is more blatant and egregious about it; they brag about it.

@jerv I won’t get into it with you on who has done what because both suck, but the American people always pay the price while the brats in DC reap the rewards of a job well done, or a people screwed again. It will be interesting seeing how it works next year with the $500 insurance penalty though, wonder who will be screaming the loudest then- lol

@KNOWITALL. Considering the large number of exemptions to that penalty, I’d say you’re almost more likely to see a millionaire than a person who has to pay that penalty. Last I checked, only ~2% of Americans were affected by that.

Then again, people like to scream and yell about falsehoods, exaggerations, and such all the time, so I suspect that most of the screaming will continue to be from those who prefer adulterous embezzlers over Democrats. In other words, it’s not the penalty that’s an issue; it’s pure partisanship.

@jerv I will have to disagree with you, as I think it will affect the middle class a lot more than most liberals believe, but we’ll see next year I guess.
I am truly concerned about people getting penalties for not being able to afford insurance, for me it has nothing to do with parties.

That’s been a big question around the requirement written into the Affordable Care Act that says each individual must have health insurance or pay a penalty.

The cost for skipping coverage starts fairly low. In year one, which is 2014,an individual will be charged the larger of either a $95 fine or 1% of their income for failing to carry health insurance coverage; families of three or more will pay $285.

That amount rises over time; by 2016, anyone without a health plan will face a fine of $695 or 2.5% ($2,085 for a family) of their household income – whichever is greater.

http://blogs.webmd.com/health-insurance-navigator/2013/01/will-you-buy-insurance-or-pay-the-penalty.html

@KNOWITALL Define must

And given the tax credits to employers for offering coverage, the ones I see possibly getting hurt are small business owners and those who work for unscrupulous employers, though many of the latter are low-income enough to be exempt.

Don’t get me wrong; it’s still a problem, just not the cataclysmic one that some people think. It’s also one that wouldn’t exist if the Invisible Hand of the Free Market was anywhere near the Utopia that some people claim.

@jerv Yeah, no use talking hypotheticals, we’ll see. It seems pretty scary to me.

@KNOWITALL It’s change, and change is often scary. Rarely without problems that require working out some bugs either.

But why would any one who could AFFORD insurance not have it?

@jerv Yep, maybe it’ll be great, I’ll stick with my private insurance though – lol

@Dutchess_III Because their employer doesn’t offer it, and without the group discount, insurance is actually not affordable? I only have insurance because my employer pays 90% of the (reduced by group discount) premium for employees, and 50% of the premium for the spouse and family. Without that, I couldn’t afford coverage myself… though it would cost a high enough percentage of my gross income that I wouldn’t pay the penalty either.

Then there are the kids (18–25) who think nothing bad could ever happen to them, so why get insurance?

I couldn’t afford it when we owned the shop.

@Dutchess_III…which is why I think that this will be a problem mostly for the self-employed and small businesses. Then again, things have been so heavily stacked against them for decades that I’m really not surprised. Such are the high costs of low prices.

@KNOWITALL in Pennsylvania you have to register at the court house or a registration booths set up by political parties. You can also ask for an absentee ballot.

I went to the courthouse to insure that I was registered for the right party. You can’t vote in the primaries if you aren’t registered as a Republican or Democrat. Registering as an Independent assures that you will not have a choice on a ballot.

On top of all that, the Republicans have successfully gerrymandered the districts to insure a republican win and to give our electoral college votes to the Republican candidate despite the fact that the majority in our state votes Democrat.