SURVEY: If you want the truth…WATCH FOX NEWS!

After years of CNN touting itself as “the most trusted name in news,” a survey (http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/PPP_Release_National_126.pdf) released Tuesday from Public Policy Polling (PPP) discovers that among major news sources, only the Fox News Channel enjoys a plurality of respondents (49%) saying they “trust” the network (vs. 37% who disagree). For CNN, only 39% trust the network’s news product, vs. 41% who do not, and the distrust is even higher when the public is asked about the broadcast networks, ABC, CBS and NBC.

FOX POSTER 10.15.2009

And, as Time media writer James Poniewozik notes (http://tunedin.blogs.time.com/2010/01/26/fox-the-most-trusted-name-in-news/) in a January 26 item “PPP, in fact, is a mainly Democratic-affiliated polling firm.” The survey included 1,151 registered voters and was conducted between January 18 and January 19. PPP is based in Raleigh, North Carolina.

Excerpts from the January 26 Public Policy Polling release (http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/PPP_Release_National_126.pdf):

A new poll asking Americans whether they trust each of the major television news operations in the country finds that the only one getting a positive review is Fox News. CNN does next best followed by NBC News, then CBS News, and finally ABC News.

49% of Americans say they trust Fox News to 37% who disagree. Predictably there is a large party split on this with 74% of Republicans but only 30% of Democrats saying they trust the right leaning network.

CNN does next best because it is the second most trusted of Democrats, Republicans, and independents. 39% say they trust it compared to 41% who do not, with 59% of Democrats, 33% of independents and 23% of Republicans saying it carries credibility with them.

The major networks all have the majority trust of Democrats but less than 20% from Republicans. NBC, perhaps because of the ideological bent of MSNBC, does the best among Democrats at 62%. Overall 35% of voters trust it to 44% who do not. CBS does the worst among Republicans, with 69% distrusting it. A plurality of independents express distrust of all five outlets we tested.

—Rich Noyes is Research Director at the Media Research Center.

Why is that those who support abortion were not aborted?

Predictable Lefty Outrage at Tebow Pro-Life Superbowl Ad

By Matthew Philbin | From Newsbusters.org
Told ya so. When reports first surfaced a few weeks ago that Focus on the Family was planning to run a pro-life ad during the Super Bowl broadcast featuring University of Florida quarter back Tim Tebow, the Culture & Media Institute predicted liberals would be upset.Like clockwork, an article in the Huffington Post on Jan. 25 reported that “a national coalition of women’s groups” that includes the National Organization for Women and the Feminist Majority is demanding that CBS reconsider its plans to run the ad.

Tebow, a Heisman Trophy winner who led the Gators to an NCAA championship, is a famously outspoken Christian noted for wearing Bible verses on his game day eye-black. He is also a walking pro-life story: the Super Bowl ad will relate how Tim’s mother, against the advice of doctors, carried him to term in a dangerous pregnancy while on a church mission to the Philippines.

Read more: http://newsbusters.org/#ixzz0dl85kks8

Disgusting porker Joy Behar admits she is celibate because she has no choice…other than her dog or friend’s mule

Joy Behar: Tim Tebow Just As Easily Could Have Been ‘Rapist Pedophile’

By Ken Shepherd | From Newsbusters.org

Discounting the pro-life argument of a planned Focus on the Family Super Bowl ad featuring Tim Tebow’s mother, Joy Behar told the audience of the January 26 “View” the the Florida quarterback just as easily could have been a “rapist pedophile.” [audio available here]“What are people flippin’ out about,” bewildered moderator Whoopi Goldberg — herself an ardent pro-choice activist — asked.

“The only argument against any of it is, that, you know, he could just as easily become some kind of a rapist pedophile. I mean, you don’t know what someone’s going to be,” Behar answered, adding:

Read more: http://newsbusters.org/#ixzz0dl6t8MPz

BREAKING NEWS: MSNBC’s David Shuster suffers brain damage during failed abortion attempt by his mother days before his birth

Shuster Shouts At Supporter Of Tebow Pro-Life Super Bowl Ad

By Mark Finkelstein | From Newsbusters.org

David Shuster has left no doubt on what side he comes down in the debate over the planned airing of a pro-life ad during the Super Bowl.  Sponsored by Focus on the Family, the ad tells the story of how Pam Tebow ignored medical advice to have an abortion, and instead gave birth to Tim, who of course went on to become a legendary college football player and inspiration to millions for his faith and character.

On MSNBC this afternoon, Shuster hosted a segment on the issue bringing together Charmaine Yoest, head of Americans United for Life and Erin Matson of NOW.  Dr. Yoest was no more than a few seconds into her defense of the ad when Shuster began shouting at her.

It was NOW/Shuster united against Yoest, but she handled it as deftly as, well, a Gator receiver beating a double-team to catch a TD pass from . . . Tim Tebow.

Read more: http://newsbusters.org/#ixzz0dl5Ul6yg

A List of the World’s Shortest Books

The Worlds Shortest Books.

THINGS I DID TO DESERVE THE NOBEL PEACE PRIZE

by Barack Obama

OTHER BLACK PEOPLE I’VE MET WHILE YACHTING

by Tiger Woods

THINGS I LOVE ABOUT MY COUNTRY

by Jane Fonda & Cindy Sheehan.
Illustrated by Michael Moore


MY CHRISTIAN ACCOMPLISHMENTS &
HOW I HELPED AFTER  KATRINA


by Rev Jesse Jackson & Rev Al Sharpton

THINGS I  LOVE ABOUT BILL
by Hillary Clinton

Sequel:
THINGS I LOVE ABOUT HILLARY
By Bill  Clinton


MY LITTLE BOOK OF PERSONAL HYGIENE
by Osama Bin Laden


THINGS I  CANNOT AFFORD
by Bill Gates


THINGS I  WOULD NOT DO FOR MONEY
by Dennis Rodman

THINGS WE KNOW TO BE TRUE
by Al Gore & John Kerry


AMELIA EARHART’S GUIDE TO THE PACIFIC


A COLLECTION of MOTIVATIONAL SPEECHES
by Dr. J.. Kevorkian


TO ALL THE MEN WE HAVE LOVED, BEFORE ……
by Ellen de Generes & Rosie O’Donnel


GUIDE TO DATING ETIQUETTE
by Mike Tyson


THE AMISH  PHONE DIRECTORY


MY PLAN TO FIND THE REAL KILLERS
by O. J. Simpson

HOW TO DRINK & DRIVE SAFELY
by Ted Kennedy
MY BOOK OF MORALS
by Bill Clinton with introduction
by the Rev. Jesse Jackson

*******************************************************

AND, JUST ADDED:
Complete Knowledge of Military Strategy!
By Nancy Pelosi

MSNBC’s Joe Scarborough is not gay but, admits he is into ‘Beastiality’

Scarborough: ‘I Prefer My Dog To Leno’

By Mark Finkelstein | From Newsbusters.org

Ouch.  Joe Scarborough on today’s Morning Joe:

JOE SCARBOROUGH: You understand what I’m saying.  I prefer Conan to Leno.  I prefer my dog to Leno. That’s just me: well, my dog’s very funny.

The irony is that–his personal preference for canine comedy notwithstanding–Joe went on to argue that from a business perspective, it makes sense to replace O’Brien with Leno . . .

Read more: http://newsbusters.org/#ixzz0ch7g7IaQ

Teddy Kennedy’s seat will be “The People’s Seat” held by Scott Brown

Shock Suffolk University Poll: Brown Surges Past Coakley in Race for ‘Ted Kennedy’ Seat

By P.J. Gladnick | From Newsbusters.org

You’ve just won a tough Democrat primary fight. You are now in the general election campaign for the “Ted Kennedy” senate seat in “Massachusettes.” So what do you do? Why, go to Disney World!

Okay, so maybe Democrat candidate Martha Coakley didn’t go to Disney World but she did take a 6 day vacation in the middle of her campaign for the U.S. Senate on December 23. Why would a candidate do something so foolish? Perhaps because she actually believed the reports in the mainstream media that she was already in possession of the “Ted Kennedy” seat and that the general election on January 19 against her Republican opponent, Scott Brown, was just a mere formality. Here is Derrick Z. Jackson of the Boston Globe declaring Coakley the “winner” on December 3:

MARTHA COAKLEY will be the state’s next US senator. Michael Capuano handed her the keys to the late Ted Kennedy’s office by getting caught up in one last dumb shouting match with the sure loser in the race, Stephen Pagliuca. One can only imagine the smile inside Coakley’s head as Capuano and Pagliuca descended into a banter so banal that Pagliuca tried to nail Capuano as the Sarah Palin of the Democratic Party.

Read more: http://newsbusters.org/#ixzz0ch6iELFm

Over 150,000 cancer deaths every year are associated with voting Democrat

Voting Democrat Causes Cancer

By Randall Hoven

Voting Democrat is associated with over 150,000 cancer deaths every year, according to the Hoven Institute for Studies Just as Valid as Studies Cited by Democrats.
To help visualize the data used in the study, consider the two maps below. In the first, high cancer rates are indicated by red and low ones by blue. In the second map, counties that voted for George W. Bush in 2000 are indicated by red, and those that voted for Al Gore are indicated by blue.

Source: USA Today.
The above maps appear to be roughly the inverse of each other. That is, locations that voted for Al Gore tended to suffer higher cancer rates.
To analyze this phenomenon more rigorously, the Hoven study looked at the cancer mortality rate and the percentage of 2000 presidential votes going to Al Gore for each of the fifty states. The result is shown in the figure below, which also includes the linear regression trend line. The slope of that line is 1.24 cancer deaths per 100,000 person-years for every percentage of vote going to Al Gore.
The correlation coefficient between cancer mortality and votes for Al Gore is 0.594. That is statistically significant from zero when taken over the fifty states. In fact, the 95% confidence interval on the slope of the trend line is 1.241 + 0.014, indicating that voting Democrat is associated with at least 1.22 cancer deaths per 100,000 person-years.
Also, the 0.594 correlation coefficient indicates that about 35% of cancer mortality is “explained” by voting Democrat. (The amount of explanation is the square of the correlation coefficient.) Thus, not all cancers are caused by voting Democrat.
The Hoven study concluded that “[v]oting Democrat is associated with cancer mortality.”  This is similar to the conclusion of the studyHealth Insurance and Mortality in US Adults,” cited by Democrats in support of their version of health care reform. That latter study concluded that “[u]ninsurance is associated with mortality.”
However, one of the co-authors of that latter study, Dr. David Himmelstein, went farther in an interview with CNN. He said that if a person is uninsured, “it means that you’re at mortal risk.” As CNN summed it up, “45,000 deaths per year in the United States are associated with the lack of health insurance.” The implication from both Dr. Himmelstein and CNN is that not only is there correlation between insurance and mortality, but also causation: Not having insurance causes you to die.
From the Hoven study, the mortality rate could be reduced by 1.24 deaths per 100,000 person-years for every percentage of the vote not going Democrat. Barack Obama won with 53% of the vote, which means the cancer mortality rate could be reduced by almost 66 — or from the current U.S. average of 209 to about 143 deaths per 100,000 person-years — if everyone refused to vote Democrat. That is a reduction of over 30% in cancer deaths. Given that there are over 500,000 cancer deaths in the U.S. every year, over 150,000 cancer deaths could be averted by not voting Democrat.
By applying the same logic in interpreting both studies, three times as many lives could be saved by no one voting Democrat as by providing universal health insurance.
Harry Reid said, “On average, an American dies from lack of health insurance every ten minutes.” If he can say that, then I can say, “On average, an American dies from voting Democrat every 3.5 minutes.” Both statements are equally valid.
(Unlike certain climate scientists, Hoven provides data sources and methods used in his study.)
Source of 2000 election results: Federal Election Commission.
Source of cancer mortality rates: National Cancer Institute.
Methods: correlation, hypothesis-testing, and confidence limit calculations found in most elementary probability and statistics textbooks. Hoven used Probability and Statistics for Engineers and Scientists, by Ronald E. Walpole and Raymond H. Myers (Macmillan Publishing Co., 1972).
Randall Hoven can be contacted at randall.hoven@gmail.com or via his website, randallhoven.com.

Page Printed from: http://www.americanthinker.com/2010/01/voting_democrat_causes_cancer.html

Thinking Americans start switching from watching NBC, CBS, ABC, and CNN to watching FOX News

Eureka, I Am a Conservative!

By Harold Witkov

For the longest time, average Americans were in a political stupor. But not anymore. In the past year, across this great nation of ours, an awakening has started. Individual Americans, by the droves, are experiencing their own political eureka moments and transforming into conservatives.
The famous Greek mathematician of antiquity Archimedes was once requested to determine if a solid gold wreath was indeed solid gold. According to legend, Archimedes, knowing he was not permitted to damage the wreath in any way, was at a loss. However, upon entering a bathtub and noting that the water level rose in accordance to his body mass, Archimedes deduced that he could perform a similar experiment comparing water level variations between the wreath in question and any solid gold material of the same weight. Upon realizing he had found the solution he was so desperately seeking, in what is often referred to as Archimedes’ eureka moment of discovery, Archimedes forgot himself and ran home naked through the streets, bellowing, “Eureka! Eureka!” (I’ve found it! I’ve found it!)
In certain Eastern religious circles, it is believed that sometimes one must discover who he is by first discovering who he is not. I have no idea if there is anything to this school of thought, but when it comes to the world of politics, I do believe there are times when one must discover where he stands politically by first recognizing what he stands against.
Now that Barack Obama and the Democrats have taken over the presidency and both Houses, more and more Americans are starting to gag from the stench of unfettered liberalism. Horrified by out-of-control spending, a socialist agenda, and weak foreign policy, a growing number of outraged Americans have been doing some major political soul-searching. Intuitively, they sense America has dangerously changed course, and a growing sea of citizens are now on the same page and thinking the same thoughts:
I am against the federal redistribution of wealth.
I am against entitlement politics.
I am against American czars.
I am against apology tours that denigrate the greatness of our country.
I am against tax-and-spend politics.
I am against government takeovers.
I am against amnesty citizenship for those who have entered our country illegally.
I am against the out-of-control printing of money.
I am against legislation designed to do away with free speech (Fairness Doctrine).
I am against big government.
I am against trillion-dollar government stimulus package slush funds.
I am against treating our allies like enemies and our enemies like friends.
I am against politicians who do not let us drill for oil.
I am against politicians who look the other way while Iran and North Korea develop nuclear weapons.
I am against government-run health care.
I am against health care bills that provide abortion funding.
I am against backroom deals by politicians that circumvent transparency and the Constitution.
I am against trillion-dollar deficits.
I am against high taxes.
I am against treating all people to the identical security scrutiny in airports.
I am against bills that provide special exemptions for legislators.
I am against bills that provide special privileges to certain states.
I am against those who would stifle an honest global warming debate.
I am against the federal funding of corrupt organizations like ACORN.
I am against “Miranda rights” for foreign terrorists.
I am against confessed 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed getting a civilian trial in NY.
I am against cap-and-trade legislation and taxing carbon footprints.
I am against the closing of GITMO and the bringing of terrorists to American soil.
I am against letting the U.N. tell us how to live.
I am against a president who does not believe in American exceptionalism.
Should I go on? Is thirty enough? The list need not end.
As Americans watch how — idea by idea and bill by bill — Barack Obama and the Democrats are dismantling our nation through their radical liberal left agenda, more and more are realizing:
Not only am I against what Barack Obama is doing to this country, but I stand for the opposite of what he, Pelosi, and Reid stand for.
This is the point in time that these Americans start investigating the opposite of liberalism. They start formulating their own list of what they stand for:
I am for low taxes.
I am for small government.
I am for a free-market system.
I am for the Constitution.
I am for the Separation of Powers.
I am for fiscal responsibility.
I am for government accountability.
I am for supporting our allies and confronting the tyrants of the world.
I am for states’ rights.
I am for a strong military.
Should I go on? This list need not end either.
While all this is taking place, these thinking Americans start switching from watching NBC, CBS, ABC, and CNN to watching FOX News. They watch Cavuto, Beck, and Hannity. They start listening to Rush Limbaugh and conservative talk radio. They read Mark Levin and Sarah Palin. Now open to invigorated conservative ideas, they reinvestigate the American story. They recall how many times the United States rescued the world from tyranny. They dust off the old economics textbook and remember the lessons about free-market systems and laissez-faire.  They spend a buck, buy a copy of the constitution, and start appreciating the sacrifices and insights of the Founding Fathers. They come to grips with living concepts like individual liberty, and they embrace the Bill of Rights. Then it happens: A metamorphosis takes place:
Eureka, I am a conservative!
If this has happened to you, do not be shy; you are not alone. Let your non-conservative friends, be they liberals or independents, know that you have had your political eureka moment and are now a conservative. Then get them started. Provide them with a list of what you are against concerning the present administration, followed by what you believe in…or just make a copy of this article and hand it to them.
Just warn them not to read it while they are taking a bath.

Page Printed from: http://www.americanthinker.com/2010/01/eureka_i_am_a_conservative.html

Sarah Palin viewership on FOX NEWS more than doubles MSNBC’s Olbermann and CNN’s Campbell Brown

Sarah Palin Draws Huge Audiences As Fox Contributor

By Noel Sheppard | From Newsbusters.org

While mainstream media members continue to belittle her at every opportunity, former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin attracted huge audiences in her first two official appearances as a Fox News Channel contributor.

Debuting on Tuesday’s “O’Reilly Factor,” the former vice presidential candidate drew almost 4 million viewers more than doubling the combined total of MSNBC’s Keith Olbermann and CNN’s Campbell Brown.

The following evening on “Glenn Beck,” Palin attracted over 3 million — at 5PM!

Regardless of what her detractors say, Palin was a smash hit (complete numbers below the fold courtesy TVBytheNumbers.com, Tuesday first):

Read more: http://newsbusters.org/#ixzz0ch39Rvt6