Watch FOX News or Else!

 I was sent the above graphic that advocates a certain point of view. One which enforces the belief that those who watch Fox News viewers are not only not-smart, but paranoid, and confused. Their tag line says Fair and Balanced. Yet, to be balanced would they have to be extremely right wing by their repeated condemnation of the mainstream drive-by media as being left wing and in the pocket of liberals? To regain some credibility and to be logical would this necessitate FOX News to  remove the word fair as well? It seems FOX News has no interest in promoting a fair and balanced news source. The motivations are clearly to offer substitute news for a specific consumer much in the same way thatMSNBC does with its own newsertainment programming such as Rachel Maddow. Yet, does MSNBC pretend to be something it is not? No. Since FOX News demonstrativelyis so intellectually inconsistent is own tag line, how can a reasonable person put this in perspective?  One idea is to read, listen, and watch a variety of sources. Just like socialism is bad because it eradicates choice and options in favor of monopolies which otherwise could not be competitive. Those who consume FOX News exclusively may be self-imposing the equivalent of a vitamin deficiency from exclusively consuming an unbalanced diet of  only same food product. It is really easy to dismiss the FOX News viewer as under-educated, non-informed, teabagger. The issue is they do manage come together and believe otherwise.

 FOX News has elements of being anti-education, anti-science, and self deluding. Consider Mr. Glenn Beck, who's education is limited to what he chose to learn when not performing as a shock jock.  Mr. Beck suggested that an education such as his is due to the good fortune of having access to a Public Library and is the equivalent of a publicly provided secondary education, but at a much better price. He believes the books there are free. A book is a tool. Selective reading does not necessarily make one educated, nor does it allow for perspective.  I seriously doubt he was challenged to consider much that fell outside his comfort and concepts put forth not to necessarily agree with, but to at least understand. The idea of education is lost on him. The promotion of ignorance is a  terrible thing, yet, he promotes it. It allows him to form a belief based on narrow information and provide a forum to promote his belief. For example, one example that if the USA continues to expand from the center by adopting a so-called  liberal agenda, we will end up much like the former USSR or North Korea. What his education disallows for his pondering of what would happen if we moved to far to right? Where we could end up with theocracies not unlike Iran. For those of you in Rio Linda, that is 'religious' run dictatorships. He fails to discuss this aspect, does he consider himself to be unfair?  No. quite the opposite and that should scare most people.