So you actually looked at the study and agreed with the methods?  How could you not see how incredibly biased it was.

Show me one question there, that you think a left leaning person is more likely to get wrong then a right leaning person... who watches no news at all.

I could see that.  Maddow went the same way.  She was always very leftwing, but she used to actually listen and debate with people back when she was an analyst now... it's just another cringe worthy show.

There isn't a show in primetime worth watching on a News network.

Unless that Mike Huckabee show is in primetime... (I think it is on saturday or sunday.)

Not that Huckabee is any better... but that show is just... interesting to watch from a "What is this?" perspective.  It's like some weird 1950's talk show.

I watched 1 episode like late at night one day... and it was entertaining in anycase... just trying to decipher where the show idea and vibe came from and what it's like.

i have a short term memory problem. do you really want me to read it again?

So you don't agree with a study until you read it's methods and then completely forget what those methods are?

Yeah, although her interview with Jon Stewart a month or so ago was one of the best things I'd seen on TV in a while. There was a really interesting dynamic at play between them, with her fawning over him and his trying to tell her as gently as possible that she was as bad as Glenn Beck. I hadn't seen her look that sad since Scott Brown won.

yes and yes

im sure nobody remebers a i thread i made a while back(that got locked cause it was in the wrong forum) about kids and race.

it asked kids in the servey simple questions like: which kid is the bad kid asking kids to point to drawings of kid like characters of different colors with some of the kids verbally answering all races are equal, (and not really nowing the survey was about race) while more then 50%(ball park cause of my memory) of kids of all races taking the survey pointing to the darker colors.

and i told you the method

What?  You didn't mention the methods of this study once, except that you think you read them.

not the OP study. the one you just quoted. it was on CNN 

I... don't see the relevence.  At all.

I do know the CNN study your talking about though.

A better think to read and study are the studies in "Blink" by malcolm gladwell.

The interesting thing is that even mixred race people and black people will point to the "Black faces" as the ones with negative connotations.

Socialization is a pretty crazy thing.

It's an interesting effect, though meaningless just as long as you know it happens and keep it in mind... and that it happens to EVERYBODY, including you, no matter how cool you think you may be with non-white people... even if you yourself are not white.

Which is why it's important to teach your kids about racial and sexual biases early.

I know I once made a racist remark when I was like... i don't know, whatever age Kintergarden is.

After a long speech with my parents though, I was fine after.

the relevence was in the arc of the 2 studies; although diff in context i was showing that without nowing how the study was done you couldn't comment on the structure of the thread, but only the title.

if you don't know how the study is being done and the questions being asked in the thread all you can comment on is the title and have kazs216 question you about it when ur original post being biased to fox news(talking about my original post cause im not a fan), and not really speaking on the thread with more then 2 words.

you assumed i didn't read the studycause i the 2 words i posted, not nowing if i read the study or not.

and i agree with the rest of your post.