|
|
|
|
Brazile was head of the DNC that turned over power to Hillary Clinton before the election.
I don't have any taboo, as a social liberal, against trashing the Clintons as much as I criticize Trump.
Both B&H Clinton and Trump are sleazy hucksters who like money and power and will do anything to get it.
Frankly, I don't believe much of any mainstream media anymore, but especially, I don't believe anything at all that's on the internet. It takes actual research to find the story.
Sorry you guys didn't make it up here but we had the crappiest foliage season in the 30 years I've been living in Vermont, so you chose well. You said you went to Auschwitz recently. I'd love to hear about it. Poland is my heritage, through and through. What was the Polish countryside like?
Hope you and Laurie are well,
Cynth
Modified by Cynthia at Mon, Nov 06, 2017, 13:24:04
|
|
|
|
Hi Cynthia,
Sorry we missed you but the shitty weather on the coast and our being a bit early for the leaves in the best of times made us redirect and drive up the Hudson River valley instead. We loved New York State. And can’t wait to finally explore more of the northeast and finally meet you.
I think that Hillary’s faults are different than Trump’s. She is a monster. It’s taken me time to get here but that’s my opinion. And yeah these shoes are going to drop. There are lots of them.
Poland, for us, was only a few days in Krakow but what a great city! I’ll say more in a bit but suddenly have to go ...
|
|
|
|
And from a secret website that I've been reading on the Dark Web it says that Hillary Clinton herself shot Seth Rich with her own Glock. Apparently, she emptied the entire clip into the guy's head and kept pulling the trigger for nearly a whole minute. Her bodyguards had to drag her away. SAD!
|
|
|
|
There’s nothing the least bit sincere or reasonable about your post. You called me an Asshole yesterday then whined like the immature crybaby you are when I called you names. You’re a troll, Drek. Face it.
|
|
|
|
It's just worth my time trying to discuss this with you.
Modified by eDrek at Mon, Nov 06, 2017, 21:47:34
|
|
|
|
Both the always suspicious Breitbart and you fail to point out that not showing full context is not reserved for CNN. Both MSNBC and FOX News constantly do this as well. You must have been in a hurry or I'm sure you would have pointed this out to the many readers here who are unfamiliar with the cable "news" game in the US.
|
|
|
|
Show me evidence of Fox misleading that way. Liberal media? Of course! No argument there. Fox is MUCH more fair and balanced.
|
|
|
|
Show me evidence of Fox misleading that way. Liberal media? Of course! No argument there. Fox is MUCH more fair and balanced.
Issued by Jim like it was pure FACT. And notice the onus is put on the non-believer to "show me the evidence".
And, "of course" liberal media is misleading. We all know that. Right, nobody has any argument contrary to that. Never. We can all agree on that, right?
Am I being a troll or am I just challenging the opinions of Jim?
|
|
|
|
Of course this link to is the liberal Huffington Post so you know what that means!!! Also, this UK media regulator, those fools, are saying this about Hannity and Carlson. So, there's no validity there either.
But this was interesting:
Ofcom’s findings carry no consequence for Fox, which hasn’t been broadcast in the U.K. since August, when Sky News took Fox off the air due to low viewership.
Sean Hannity, Tucker Carlson Declared Too Biased For UK Viewers
Modified by eDrek at Tue, Nov 07, 2017, 10:46:35
|
|
|
|
Are you really unable to distinguish between fact and opinion? All you’ve done is shown that liberals don’t like them. So what? DC asserted that Fox misleads viewers by not showing the real context. Like the liberal media did with Trump feeding the fish or his comments about the auto industry. Outright lies. Full-blown intentional malicious deception. And that’s just yesterday’s! So where does Fox mislead that way? Put up or shut up.
|
|
|
|
What is this supposed to mean?
Are you really unable to distinguish between fact and opinion? All you’ve done is shown that liberals don’t like them.
What is 'them'? Facts or opinions?
Is it this:
All you’ve done is shown that liberals don’t like facts.
Or is it:
All you’ve done is shown that liberals don’t like opinions (that are being put out as facts).
Either way, you're playing word games.
In your original post you say:
Show me evidence of Fox misleading that way. Liberal media? Of course! No argument there. Fox is MUCH more fair and balanced.
I'm saying what are saying is your opinion. You even use the Fox News byline 'Fair and Balanced'. Yeah, right. If they, Fox, says so then it must be true. Why would they ever lie or mislead? Trust me, they're legit, right?
And then you tell me to put up or shut up. No, it's your job to defend your opinions about the so-called liberal news and Fox News. Prove it, Jim. It's not my job. I did not post it out there as if it were FACT. You did.
|
|
|
|
You’re flailing wildly. DC made an empty claim and I asked for evidence in support. He has offered none and neither have you. Instead, garbage.
Modified by Jim at Tue, Nov 07, 2017, 14:52:02
|
|
|
|
Ok, so DC didn't come back to you.
Nevertheless, you put out some opinions about Fox and liberal media.
I asked you to defend them.
You refuse to do so.
I'm being irrational? No, you're dodging the question.
|
|
|
|
I'm impartial, and if you guys like , am willing to adjudicate. I'm not a shrink though and some say it's not a gun issue, it's a mental health one.
|
|
|
|
I have asked you to defend your facts/opinions. You refuse to and now this?
|
|
|
|
Oh my god, it's amazing, appalling and downright bizarre how irrational you are acting. Here's the issue -
DC said this:
Both the always suspicious Breitbart and you fail to point out that not showing full context is not reserved for CNN. Both MSNBC and FOX News constantly do this as well. I challenged him to provide any proof. He didn't. You didn't. 13 didn't.
I, on the other hand, showed two such examples of just the last couple of days, i.e. lying about Trump on his own dumping the box of fish food into the pond (in fact, he was merely following the PM's lead) and Trump urging auto makers to build in America as if they weren't when the unedited video shows that he fully acknowledged that some were doing so.
So again, you have provided no evidence of any such misrepresentation of context. Neither have DC, 13 or anyone. Why? Because there isn't any.
Modified by Jim at Tue, Nov 07, 2017, 21:47:50
|
|
|
|
You said:
Fox is MUCH more fair and balanced.
Is that fact or opinion? If you claim it as a fact then I want some proof.
|
|
|
|
You are either incapable or unwilling to discuss anything rationally. Maybe you know that and maybe you don't but it's apparent that you only post to harass.
|
|
|
|
What is wrong with my asking you a question? I asked this question a long time ago and you just won't answer.
I'm totally serious. I'm not trolling you.
If you don't want to answer why don't you just admit it?
Modified by eDrek at Tue, Nov 07, 2017, 23:11:36
|
|
|
|
Pretty basic how this goes. You are avoiding the issue and trying to change the subject. Can't you see that? Oh right, you don't answer questions. You're not here for discussion but harassment.
|
|
|
|
I asked you the question first. I am trying to have a discussion. You're the one playing games here saying I have to answer your question when, again, I asked you a question first.
Admit it, you won't answer my question and we're done here.
|
|
|
|
You and I both called it quits. You said you gave up, I said that's fine, let's let things develop and that was that. Then, separately, DC said what he said about Fox and Breitbart tricking people by misrepresenting context and you jumped back in absurdly mocking me for asking DC for some supporting evidence. It's all here in this thread. Anyone can see it.
|
|
|
|
Yes, I did give up on the one discussion in this thread and that discussion was my post where I asked you the following in the subject:
Jim, is there one single right wing conspiracy theory you don't buy into?
In my opinion that part of this thread was a separate topic or a separate path. I gave up on that side discussion because you went off on my accusing me, again, of being a troll. I wrote a much longer response that was quite critical of you and how I see you behaving and your right wing belief system. I deleted that post and replaced it with the 'I give up' post. Ok?
And just because I gave up on a side discussion in this thread does not, in my opinion, keep me out of other parts of the thread. Maybe in your rules??? But, not in mine.
Again, the only question I'm asking you in this part of the thread is where you say 'Fox is MUCH more fair and balanced.' Is that a fact or your unbiased opinion, Jim?
|
|
|
|
Sorry, you don't get to do this. DC made a specific claim. I challenged him for supporting evidence. You posted what you claimed was an answer but it was not. That is it was not responsive. Specifically, it did not provide any evidence of Fox or Breitbart misrepresenting things by ignoring their true context.
Put it this way. You said you gave up and I said that was fine. Then DC made a claim which I challenged and you tried to answer that challenge. However, you totally failed in that you did NOT provide an example of what DC asserted. Everything else is noise.
|
|
|
|
I asked that way back.
Here's the link:
http://www.prem-rawat-talk.org/cgi-bin/anyboard.cgi/nonrawat?cmd=get&cG=5303334333&zu=3530333230&v=2&gV=0&p=
Just answer one of these:
- I don't want to answer your questions
- They were Facts (and it would be nice to back it up)
- They were opinions
|
|
|
|
I wrote:
Are you really unable to distinguish between fact and opinion? All you’ve done is shown that liberals don’t like them. So what? DC asserted that Fox misleads viewers by not showing the real context. Like the liberal media did with Trump feeding the fish or his comments about the auto industry. Outright lies. Full-blown intentional malicious deception. And that’s just yesterday’s! So where does Fox mislead that way? Put up or shut up.
You've said a bunch of words since then but the one thing you have not done is answer the question.
|
|
|
|
You say:
Are you
really unable to distinguish between fact and opinion? All you’ve done
is shown that liberals don’t like them. So what? DC asserted that Fox
misleads viewers by not showing the real context. Like the liberal media
did with Trump feeding the fish or his comments about the auto
industry. Outright lies. Full-blown intentional malicious deception. And
that’s just yesterday’s! So where does Fox mislead that way? Put up or
shut up.
I'm sorry, Jim, but I don't see an answer to my simple question in that. All I see is you not answering my question and asking me questions instead.
Again, Fact or Opinion? Maybe I can't distinguish them when you put out your Opinions like they are proven facts.
|
|
|
|
and that answer is that you won't answer my simple question.
Fine. Thanks. We're done with this one, Jim.
|
|
|
|
OF COURSE your media regulatory body’s part of the Marxist conspiracy! Look, you are presenting no evidence of Fox misleading viewers by distorting or ignoring context. ZERO. In contrast, look at the example I️ posted above.
|
|
|
|
The article I linked to very specifically says why Fox is biased. What is it you don't understand?
'The media watchdog said there was a lack of impartial views and that presenter Hannity voiced his enthusiastic support for the order and the Trump administration throughout. Ofcom acknowledged the expectation of viewers in the UK to a broadcast that was generally more supportive of the US Republican Party, but said that it still did not significantly balance the number of critical statements from those who opposed the order.' No-one in the UK from any political party would describe Ofcom as Marxist! You're so right wing Jim!
|
|
|
|
Actually, it's beyond right wing. I have no problem with right wing. People on the right value independence and minimal government interference. They're big on individual rights. That's easily understandable. People on the left are more inclined to bigger government for the sake of better provision for the poor and needy. They're big on shared responsibility. There's nothing wrong with either view - it's just a matter of finding a balance most people are happy with. Describing Ofcom as Marxist puts you on a different scale!
|
|
|
|
We could go round in circles about this but if you’re trying to stay on topic you’re missing the boat. I spelled out the issue many times now. It’s whether or not Fox and Breitbart mislead viewers by misrepresenting the true context of things the way CNN and the MSM do as demonstrated just this week in the examples I offered. That’s the issue you spoke up to address. But addressing and actually answering are two different things. Either you have such evidence or you don’t.
Modified by Jim at Wed, Nov 08, 2017, 01:54:20
|
|
|
|
A thread starts off with one topic, but it can splinter off into different topics that may or may not be directly related to the first post in the thread.
I'm surprised you are not aware of this feature since so often you will change the subject abruptly as you have so many, many times.
13 is talking about Ofcom here and the post I made about Fox News in the UK.
|
|
|
|
You really don’t. Don’t forget that you first tried to answer my challenge to DC. Only you didn’t. Same with 13. He also tried - but didn’t. The challenge was to provide evidence of out-of-context deception by Fox and Breitbart. Both of you just posted some evidence of accusations of bias which, true or not, misses the mark.
What is it about logic that you don’t get? It’s so basic. You can’t just throw words at a question. You have to meet it directly. None of you did. If you stripped this down to the fundamental logic here, it couldn’t be clearer. DC made a claim that he couldn’t support. In contrast, I provided evidence of MSM context distortion. I “win”. An impartial observer would have to conclude that there’s evidence presented of the MSM lying in a way that, in this thread at least, no one’s shown Fox and Breitbart doing.
Modified by Jim at Wed, Nov 08, 2017, 10:26:10
|
|
|
|
So, if I start a new thread with the subject of:
Jim said that 'Fox is MUCH more fair and balanced'
And then in the message body asked you to provide evidence of your claim that would be acceptable?
Maybe I'm confused here, but I thought with hierarchical forums like the one we have here that you can branch off into separate subtopics. You know, how the indentation shows that.
I mean, in the thread that starts with 'Welcome to Kenya' you all of a sudden change the subject in your post titled 'All you can do is swear?' to have this message:
Hillary's going to jail, Drek. I was right. You'll see.
And then the thread got off of the Kenya/Birther topic into your topic about Hillary.
|
|
|
|
Threads can have any number of discussions. Of course they can. This one right here with you and I arguing about how we've been arguing is a perfect example. We don't need a separate thread for it. All that matters is that we're logical and responsive with each other. I repeat, it's not as if neither you nor 13 ignored the issue. You both attempted to address it, kind of. However, the evidence you offered wasn't on point.
|
|
|
|
........appointed Official Arbiter of Reality, I await many of his rulings re: your atrocious behavior.
Until then, this will have to hold you.
http://www.newshounds.us/
Related link: http://www.newshounds.us/
Modified by DCcultmember at Wed, Nov 08, 2017, 01:58:27
|
|
|
|
You made a claim based on nothing and have no evidence to support it. You lose. Finished.
|
|
|
|
I disagree, Jim. DC's posted a link to a website that exposed your precious Fox News as full of lies and fake news.
So, somehow you need to back up your claim to be the winner of this thread:
Fox is MUCH more fair and balanced.
And, Jim, it's not always about being a winner versus being a loser. Sometimes, it's about being a nice person, too.
|
|
|
|
Can you tell the difference between these two questions?
1) Are Fox and Breitart fair and balanced?
2) Do Fox and Breitbart mislead people by ignoring context the way the MSM does?
It seems like none of you are able to do that.
|
|
|
|
That looks real good. Don't let Trumps treason club distract you from Hillary. One already pleaded guilty and a couple more wear ankle bracelets awaiting trial.
|
|
|
|
Everyone, including the Trumpster, will get a Presidential pardon. No one, except Crooked Hillary, goes to jail.
America! America! God shed his grace on thee...
Modified by eDrek at Wed, Nov 08, 2017, 23:29:16
|
|
|
