Page 18 of 20 FirstFirst ... 81617181920 LastLast
Results 681 to 720 of 789
  1. #681
    Clod Hopper's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    The Big Prairie, Colorado
    Member #
    816
    Images
    80
    Proudly un-offended.

  2. #682

  3. #683
    creepycrawler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    The land of free bacon.
    Member #
    5806
    At least affirmative actiin president harris can apparently cook a roast.


    From Fox News - Kamala Harris has gone 14 days without a news conference since being tapped for border crisis role
    Kamala Harris has gone 14 days without a news conference since being tapped for border crisis role

    https://www.foxnews.com/politics/kam...-border-crisis
    From the only state in the USA where O'dumbass failed to carry a single county. :hail:

  4. #684
    Quote Originally Posted by noahfecks View Post
    And now anyone who makes the choice not to get the vaccine is a moron according to you.
    Yes.

    I think anti-vaxxers are morons. Actually, I think they're worse than that - they're selfish, dangerous assholes.

    My son contracted whooping cough at an age when we wasn't fully vaccinated yet because one of the parents of a sick child in his preschool lied about their child's vaccination, and selfishly sent their sick kid to preschool.

    My son had several years of lung infections, asthma, and is still prone to breathing difficulty years later at the age of almost 11 years old.

    So yeah, I actually have a much much much lower opinion of people who think they know better than to trust science when it comes to vaccines.

    - mike

  5. #685
    Clod Hopper's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    The Big Prairie, Colorado
    Member #
    816
    Images
    80
    So you sent your kid to school not vaccinated, but it is the fault of the OTHER parent who did the same thing. Got it.

  6. #686
    Quote Originally Posted by Clod Hopper View Post
    So you sent your kid to school not vaccinated, but it is the fault of the OTHER parent who did the same thing. Got it.

    I understand that you wanted to make a point about me or something, but I hope you can see how incredibly ill-informed you are about how vaccinations work with children at an early age.


    So for those who don't have children, or who haven't gone through the vaccine process for their children at a young age:

    Children follow a vaccine schedule when they're young, in that they get several doses over a period of time to help them build up immunity - almost exactly like how the Moderna COVID vaccine is given in two doses over the course of a month.

    In order for our child to attend preschool, we had to prove that he had started and was continuing on the accepted vaccination schedule as set forth by the CDC, Colorado Dept. of Health, etc.

    So we were fully complying with that.

    Another parent had enrolled their child having lied about that progress along the same vaccination schedule, and placed multiple other partially-vaccinated children at risk.

    Maybe you've learned something today,
    mike

  7. #687
    Quote Originally Posted by sweater View Post
    So yeah... when I post about stuff I intentionally try to find multiple different sources of information, instead of solely relying on a single news source like... Fox News, for example.
    You go to your typical sources and then reflexively discount any source that disagrees with your point of view. Just because you post multiple "sources" from your echo chamber sources doesn't mean you are seeking the truth, just affirmation. That's the lack of self-awareness.
    In addition, you are post about what "typical" conservatives do and then claim "typical" libs are so well read because you individually do your "research". Generalize much?
    I started with nothing, and I've got most of it left.

  8. #688
    Quote Originally Posted by SamFromCO View Post
    You go to your typical sources and then reflexively discount any source that disagrees with your point of view. Just because you post multiple "sources" from your echo chamber sources doesn't mean you are seeking the truth, just affirmation. That's the lack of self-awareness.

    In addition, you are post about what "typical" conservatives do and then claim "typical" libs are so well read because you individually do your "research". Generalize much?
    Well if you're talking about my "typical sources" then yes - I go to "typical sources" that are more factually-based and are evaluated as being much objectively much more factually-based. This is not necessarily my point of view, but the point of view that I've come to through the help of sources that are - again - objectively much more factually-based.

    Now for people who keep yelling about "facts", pretty sure this chart is one of the most useful things I've seen in this thread (below, hat tip to Clod Hopper). The sources I most often tend to cite are at the top-middle of that chart. Sources that rate higher on "Fact reporting", "Original fact reporting", and are evaluated as being in the middle of the political bias scale.

    When someone comes along solely with MSNBC or Fox News sources, which you can see are rated as more opinionated and biased, I tend to dismiss them much more as being less-factually-based.

    Long story short: if your sources are down and to the left or down and to the right, not sure I give a crap about them. I wonder why anyone else would, as well, aside from pure entertainment.

    - mike

    Quote Originally Posted by Clod Hopper View Post

  9. #689
    Quote Originally Posted by SamFromCO View Post
    By the way. Where are conservatives supposed to go to find out about stuff
    So here's the cool thing about this thread - you actually got an answer to your question from Clod Hopper (below).

    This is an EXCELLENT guide for you. This so clearly shows which news sources you can go to, and more importantly helps you understand how much bias you might be dealing with when you go to that news source.

    It's simple:

    • If you go to the Associated Press, United Press International, Stars and Stipes, CBS and others up there at the top-middle, you are going to a news source that is in the middle of the road bias-wise and is more dedicated to factual reporting.
    • If you go to Fox News, Huffpost, OAN, MSNBC, Daily Kos or Newsmax - using this guide - you can realize you're going to news sources that are much more biased, are much more opinionated, incomplete, unfair, more propagandized and have higher variations of reliability in their reporting.


    No really - this guide is awesome. It's very simple: if your news sources are at the top middle you're basically getting more a more truthful report. If your news sources start to slide down the sides, your news sources are getting crappier and crappier.

    Ask yourself where the majority of your news comes from, look it up on this diagram, and do one of two things:

    1) Realize that you're getting news from a more biased source, where opinion and persuasion might be playing more of a role than you think, and change your news sources in order to get a more complete perspective of an issue.

    or

    2) Stay with your current, biased news sources and be happy with your confirmation bias.

    I assure you that #1 is more uncomfortable but ultimately more rewarding. #2 is the vast majority of the "news" articles I see posted here.

    - mike


    Quote Originally Posted by Clod Hopper View Post

  10. #690
    Clod Hopper's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    The Big Prairie, Colorado
    Member #
    816
    Images
    80
    Quote Originally Posted by sweater View Post
    - you actually got an answer to your question from Clod Hopper (below).
    Mike.... while I appreciate your hat tips, the graphic is still not a definitive presentation. It is really just the opinion of whoever created it at Ad Fontes Media, whoever that is. It will have biases baked into it from the maker. I thought it was interesting to look through and the thread needed some color to spruce the place up. Get the fung schway right.

    The consistent problem I find on all these bias graphics is determining what is center. Liberals mostly think they are center to center left, and Conservs think they are center to center right. Well that can't be. It has so much to do with the people you interact with daily that builds your impression of average or center. Well that isnt a good indicator of true center. Beyond that, our general culture has moved right or left over time. Trying to nail down what center should be is no different than nailing jello to the wall.

    The chart I posted looks to me to have a left bias. With NBC, CNBC WSJ near the top and CNN not far down, particularly after all those have been found to exhibit a left bias on their own. CBS is right up by the top, but they carry 60 minutes which has a history of not quite truthful reporting. But I recognize I also have my center bias like everyone else. Additionally, "News Value and Reliability" is very subjective. How you say? Obvious examples could be Twitter and Facebook applying warnings on some things but not others, pushing the concepts of truth and reality to very grey areas. No different watching the news from "reliable" sources.

  11. #691
    Clod Hopper's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    The Big Prairie, Colorado
    Member #
    816
    Images
    80
    Quote Originally Posted by sweater View Post
    I understand that you wanted to make a point about me or something, but I hope you can see how incredibly ill-informed you are about how vaccinations work with children at an early age.


    So for those who don't have children, or who haven't gone through the vaccine process for their children at a young age:

    Children follow a vaccine schedule when they're young, in that they get several doses over a period of time to help them build up immunity - almost exactly like how the Moderna COVID vaccine is given in two doses over the course of a month.

    In order for our child to attend preschool, we had to prove that he had started and was continuing on the accepted vaccination schedule as set forth by the CDC, Colorado Dept. of Health, etc.

    So we were fully complying with that.

    Another parent had enrolled their child having lied about that progress along the same vaccination schedule, and placed multiple other partially-vaccinated children at risk.

    Maybe you've learned something today,
    mike

    some things you can correctly infer. others not so much.

    Have kids. Several. All had to be fully vaxxed prior to starting school. I grew up military where we got all the vaxxes in a single rusty spike and then sent outside to play til dark.

    I still think it silly to blame other people for the situation where you or yours caught a disease that is incredibly common in our world. But if it helps you survive your world with a sane mind, then you do you.

  12. #692
    Quote Originally Posted by Clod Hopper View Post
    I still think it silly to blame other people for the situation where you or yours caught a disease that is incredibly common in our world.
    I agree, wholeheartedly. I agree 100% with personal responsibility.

    This was a situation where the parent(s) of that child took zero responsibility for their decisions and actions, and it resulted in negative effects to those around them.

    They signed the same papers that we did, agreeing to follow the same rules that we did, and then for whatever reasons - willingness to be dishonest and selfish being the main ones, I feel - they opted to not follow those rules that the rest of the group was following. This private business mandated that vaccination schedules be followed, and if they disagreed with that mandate they were welcome to take their business elsewhere.

    But they didn't.

    So I don't think that it's silly to expect people to own up to the consequences of their decisions, and I don't think it was silly for my wife and I to expect that my kids' cohorts were at least partially vaccinated. Whether or not he was safer is immaterial - we deliberately sought out preschool that only took in vaccinated children, as was our decision to bring our business to that school.

    In society there are rules that you're going to need to play by, and one of the ugliest side effects of this last year has been to highlight a tremendous amount of friction between anti-vaxxers and anti-maskers and private businesses. I personally don't believe that government should require you to wear a mask or to get a vaccine, even if I think the refusal to do those things is based on what I consider to be logically unsound reasoning.

    But does that stop people making that personal decision about vaccines and masks from thinking that they can still access a private businesses services with no pushback? Sure doesn't seem so.

    - mike

  13. #693
    Clod Hopper's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    The Big Prairie, Colorado
    Member #
    816
    Images
    80
    Quote Originally Posted by sweater View Post
    In society there are rules that you're going to need to play by, and one of the ugliest side effects of this last year has been to highlight a tremendous amount of friction between anti-vaxxers and anti-maskers and private businesses. I personally don't believe that government should require you to wear a mask or to get a vaccine, even if I think the refusal to do those things is based on what I consider to be logically unsound reasoning.

    But does that stop people making that personal decision about vaccines and masks from thinking that they can still access a private businesses services with no pushback? Sure doesn't seem so.

    - mike
    I probably am not that far away from your position, but I come at it from the other side. I dont think govt should be mandating masks, but more importantly, govt shouldnt be threatening businesses with pulling licenses or shutting them down based on what customers are doing. In other words, it is not the responsibility of the private business to enforce the mandates of the government. OK yeah sure, laws need to be followed, but the masking wasnt a law.

    Personal responsibility doesnt mean the same for everyone. Just from your story, you and I see it differently. With regard to Covid, I belive the govt should be giving education/recommendations and such. Not some pseudo law that isnt really enforceable, but as long as people follow it envelope pushing. Businesses should have been allowed to be exempt fo the mandates, advertise and put up notices to that effect. Some businesses will, some wont, and let the market decide what to do. Maskers know which stores to go to, and anti-maskers have places they can go also. If the culture and govt encourage masking successfully, the stores requiring masks will get all the business and the others will eventually follow suit. Or vice versa. If the general populace doesnt fear the virus, then I guess it really isnt a problem. They generally dont fear driving a car which is dangerous too.

    But personal responsibility also means that if you have special needs regarding a virus, it doesn't fall to each and every fellow man to upend their lives to reduce the risk in your life. I am not an asshole. If people in my life have health issues, I mask around them or avoid being with them, that is called respecting your fellow man. In public, do the same. If a person walking toward me has a mask on, I take the long way around to give them space as they clearly are worried about it. If some walks up to me without a mask on and sticks out their hand for a shake, well, that tells me they are not worried and we continue on like life was over a year ago.

    The covid thing isnt black and white. My opinion is the first couple weeks or maybe a month, it was prudent for the govt to grab the reins as we didnt have good info on what was going on and the risks. The problem began after that with obscured data, lack of logic and an overabundance of caution that spurred the continued unreasonable mandates from govt, almost all of it being used exclusively as political sport at the expense of the people and the economy. I view the local mandates much like I view the presidential EO's. They are only short term bridge actions that carry until the congress gets it properly dealt with. A rigid short term expiration date must be a part of an EO or governor's mandate. While I suspect many would agree with that concept, very few will stand up and call bullchit when ANY president or gov legislates with EOs. Bush, Obama, Trump, Biden, all of them abused EO ability. Biden is making an art form out of it.
    Last edited by Clod Hopper; April 7th, 2021 at 03:38 PM.

  14. #694
    creepycrawler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    The land of free bacon.
    Member #
    5806
    Quote Originally Posted by sweater View Post
    So here's the cool thing about this thread - you actually got an answer to your question from Clod Hopper (below).

    This is an EXCELLENT guide for you. This so clearly shows which news sources you can go to, and more importantly helps you understand how much bias you might be dealing with when you go to that news source.

    It's simple:

    • If you go to the Associated Press, United Press International, Stars and Stipes, CBS and others up there at the top-middle, you are going to a news source that is in the middle of the road bias-wise and is more dedicated to factual reporting.
    • If you go to Fox News, Huffpost, OAN, MSNBC, Daily Kos or Newsmax - using this guide - you can realize you're going to news sources that are much more biased, are much more opinionated, incomplete, unfair, more propagandized and have higher variations of reliability in their reporting.


    No really - this guide is awesome. It's very simple: if your news sources are at the top middle you're basically getting more a more truthful report. If your news sources start to slide down the sides, your news sources are getting crappier and crappier.

    Ask yourself where the majority of your news comes from, look it up on this diagram, and do one of two things:

    1) Realize that you're getting news from a more biased source, where opinion and persuasion might be playing more of a role than you think, and change your news sources in order to get a more complete perspective of an issue.

    or

    2) Stay with your current, biased news sources and be happy with your confirmation bias.

    I assure you that #1 is more uncomfortable but ultimately more rewarding. #2 is the vast majority of the "news" articles I see posted here.

    - mike

    And yet he still can't dispute any of the Fox articles that i have posted.

  15. #695
    Quote Originally Posted by Clod Hopper View Post
    I probably am not that far away from your position, but I come at it from the other side. I dont think govt should be mandating masks, but more importantly, govt shouldnt be threatening businesses with pulling licenses or shutting them down based on what customers are doing. In other words, it is not the responsibility of the private business to enforce the mandates of the government. OK yeah sure, laws need to be followed, but the masking wasnt a law.

    Personal responsibility doesnt mean the same for everyone. Just from your story, you and I see it differently. With regard to Covid, I belive the govt should be giving education/recommendations and such. Not some pseudo law that isnt really enforceable, but as long as people follow it envelope pushing. Businesses should have been allowed to be exempt fo the mandates, advertise and put up notices to that effect. Some businesses will, some wont, and let the market decide what to do. Maskers know which stores to go to, and anti-maskers have places they can go also. If the culture and govt encourage masking successfully, the stores requiring masks will get all the business and the others will eventually follow suit. Or vice versa. If the general populace doesnt fear the virus, then I guess it really isnt a problem. They generally dont fear driving a car which is dangerous too.

    But personal responsibility also means that if you have special needs regarding a virus, it doesn't fall to each and every fellow man to upend their lives to reduce the risk in your life. I am not an asshole. If people in my life have health issues, I mask around them or avoid being with them, that is called respecting your fellow man. In public, do the same. If a person walking toward me has a mask on, I take the long way around to give them space as they clearly are worried about it. If some walks up to me without a mask on and sticks out their hand for a shake, well, that tells me they are not worried and we continue on like life was over a year ago.

    The covid thing isnt black and white. My opinion is the first couple weeks or maybe a month, it was prudent for the govt to grab the reins as we didnt have good info on what was going on and the risks. The problem began after that with obscured data, lack of logic and an overabundance of caution that spurred the continued unreasonable mandates from govt, almost all of it being used exclusively as political sport at the expense of the people and the economy. I view the local mandates much like I view the presidential EO's. They are only short term bridge actions that carry until the congress gets it properly dealt with. A rigid short term expiration date must be a part of an EO or governor's mandate. While I suspect many would agree with that concept, very few will stand up and call bullchit when ANY president or gov legislates with EOs. Bush, Obama, Trump, Biden, all of them abused EO ability. Biden is making an art form out of it.
    This is really thoughtful, well-worded, and a good read. As an aside, I agree with pretty much all of it - the only stickiness that I've personally seen has been this part:

    "Maskers know which stores to go to, and anti-maskers have places they can go also."

    I think that there have been far too many people who have challenged a private business' mask rules. That far too many people don't understand that a business can deny them access or service. And what follows is the manufactured outrage by so many of those people, blah blah blah.

    Look - I can stand back and not understand, not really care to understand, and poke at people who don't want to vaccinate or wear masks but I really don't want to take away their ability to make those choices. Definitely not. The problem, for me, comes when those people who make those choices don't respect other's boundaries for whatever reasons they want to use in the moment. That's when they can GTFO.

    - mike

  16. #696
    Quote Originally Posted by creepycrawler View Post
    And yet he still can't dispute any of the Fox articles that i have posted.
    Please reference this:

    Quote Originally Posted by sweater View Post
    When someone comes along solely with MSNBC or Fox News sources, which you can see are rated as more opinionated and biased, I tend to dismiss them much more as being less-factually-based.

    Long story short: if your sources are down and to the left or down and to the right, not sure I give a crap about them. I wonder why anyone else would, as well, aside from pure entertainment.
    Highlighting my own stuff for clarity.

    That's why I don't really care to step into that arena.

    Give me some news sources that are higher up that graph and towards the middle and we're on.

    Just as I would not expect you to have to respond to some article I post from Huffpost or Occupy Democrats.

    - mike

  17. #697
    If you believe that masks actually do something, then wear one (or more). You're protected then right? Don't push your conclusions on others.

    I reluctantly wear one for other reasons when I have to, and luckily ND doesn't have many stores who require masks except those chain stores.
    God Forgives, Rock's Don't www.ucora.org
    1973 Bronco, 351 SEFI, Locked, discs, 35's ZF-5spd and Atlas 4spd. 235:1 Crawl Ratio

  18. #698
    creepycrawler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    The land of free bacon.
    Member #
    5806
    Quote Originally Posted by sweater View Post
    Please reference this:



    Highlighting my own stuff for clarity.

    That's why I don't really care to step into that arena.

    Give me some news sources that are higher up that graph and towards the middle and we're on.

    Just as I would not expect you to have to respond to some article I post from Huffpost or Occupy Democrats.

    - mike
    I guess i don't get why a story is to be disregarded simply on the basis that the news source it comes from leans either right or left as long as its factual.

    I don't watch any news on tv as i don't watch much tv period so as a rule, i check FOX and CNN websites pretty much every day and CNN is in my opinion way more left than FOX is right. Either way, have and do post things from CNN as well although admittedly not near as often.

  19. #699
    Quote Originally Posted by creepycrawler View Post
    I guess i don't get why a story is to be disregarded simply on the basis that the news source it comes from leans either right or left as long as its factual.
    That's the sticking point: the factual part.

    Fox News (and CNN, and MSNBC, and Huffpost, etcetera) present their stories with far too much opinions and subjectivity crammed into those stories in order to sway their readership.

    News sources higher up on that graph -

    and yes, I agree with Clod Hopper on how that graph isn't the end-all, be-all of how news sources should be categorized but it's a great start

    - those higher-up news sources are objectively better at presenting facts without as much opinion and persuasion mixed in. So if you're going to address/debate/whatever a Fox News or Huffpost story, you're battling uphill by trying to wade through the opinionated, persuasive language of the article first. Higher up that graph == less opinion, more facts.

    - mike

  20. #700
    Clod Hopper's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    The Big Prairie, Colorado
    Member #
    816
    Images
    80
    Quote Originally Posted by sweater View Post
    This is really thoughtful, well-worded, and a good read. As an aside, I agree with pretty much all of it - the only stickiness that I've personally seen has been this part:

    "Maskers know which stores to go to, and anti-maskers have places they can go also."

    I think that there have been far too many people who have challenged a private business' mask rules. That far too many people don't understand that a business can deny them access or service. And what follows is the manufactured outrage by so many of those people, blah blah blah.

    Look - I can stand back and not understand, not really care to understand, and poke at people who don't want to vaccinate or wear masks but I really don't want to take away their ability to make those choices. Definitely not. The problem, for me, comes when those people who make those choices don't respect other's boundaries for whatever reasons they want to use in the moment. That's when they can GTFO.

    - mike
    Agreed. Making a political stand by abusing your fellow man is the wrong way to do it. If your (everyone, not just sweater) beef is with government, then find a way to protest the govt, not be a jerk to a business owner. I will say, however, if masking is not mandated by gov and the business corporate level institutes a mask mandate, then the beef is with the business, so protest through avoidance rather than stomp around maskless like a child. I have no issues with the link to the texas woman arrested. Exactly the same as civil disobedience of leftist protestors. I disagree with her choice to hamper a business to do her objection, but leftist civil disobedience protestors block up businesses and highways, so it isnt any different.

    There is alot of ridicule about polite behavior of decades ago in our common culture today. To many are encouraging bad behavior (just being publicly rude or inflammatory or disrespectful) as this is some sort of societal protest and being protest it must be good. All that is hogwash. The thrust of bad behavior protesting is aimed at the people in the vicinity who have no influence on whatever the protest is about. That does absolutely no good, and just incites unnecessary friction and obscures the real problems or the responsible actors.

    I cannot control what others do, but I can encourage good behavior and set an example of it. That is in real life, what I say on line doesnt count.

  21. #701
    Clod Hopper's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    The Big Prairie, Colorado
    Member #
    816
    Images
    80
    Quote Originally Posted by sweater View Post
    That's the sticking point: the factual part.

    Fox News (and CNN, and MSNBC, and Huffpost, etcetera) present their stories with far too much opinions and subjectivity crammed into those stories in order to sway their readership.

    News sources higher up on that graph -

    and yes, I agree with Clod Hopper on how that graph isn't the end-all, be-all of how news sources should be categorized but it's a great start

    - those higher-up news sources are objectively better at presenting facts without as much opinion and persuasion mixed in. So if you're going to address/debate/whatever a Fox News or Huffpost story, you're battling uphill by trying to wade through the opinionated, persuasive language of the article first. Higher up that graph == less opinion, more facts.

    - mike
    From my experience travelling internationally, foreign news sources are far less involved in baking opinion into news stories in an attempt to sway opinion. I see it as a side effect of capitalism driving business decisions for broadcasters. The foreign sources are more likely influenced by the government ideals. I dont know for sure which is worse, but my general preference is to rely on capitalism systems as it is more predictable even with the flaws.

    Higher on the graph? Maybe it is an indication of something, but again, just like determination of center, the "truthfulness" of a organization is also an opinion. In my mind, that graph will change depending on the creator's opinions, and the logos will rotate through top center as you scoot the center. Those that are viewed as "center" bias will always be at the top and drop down as you move away from center. I suspect the graph says much more about the graph creator than it does about the news organizations themselves.

    As an aside, I have tried many times over the years to graph cultural center of the US as it sways one way and then the other over the decades. What I keep running into is how to properly "zero" the center and also keep my own influences out. Super hard.
    Last edited by Clod Hopper; April 8th, 2021 at 10:52 AM.

  22. #702
    Clod Hopper's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    The Big Prairie, Colorado
    Member #
    816
    Images
    80
    Factual-ness of a news organization isnt black and white. If you demand (legally enforced) that news orgs only produce verifiable facts, we will lose the investigative journalism that has been what pushes back on govt tyranny and corruption. Fixing one problem can often create a worse one.

  23. #703
    creepycrawler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    The land of free bacon.
    Member #
    5806
    Quote Originally Posted by sweater View Post
    That's the sticking point: the factual part.

    Fox News (and CNN, and MSNBC, and Huffpost, etcetera) present their stories with far too much opinions and subjectivity crammed into those stories in order to sway their readership.

    News sources higher up on that graph -

    and yes, I agree with Clod Hopper on how that graph isn't the end-all, be-all of how news sources should be categorized but it's a great start

    - those higher-up news sources are objectively better at presenting facts without as much opinion and persuasion mixed in. So if you're going to address/debate/whatever a Fox News or Huffpost story, you're battling uphill by trying to wade through the opinionated, persuasive language of the article first. Higher up that graph == less opinion, more facts.

    - mike
    Facts in NEWS stories are facts and that is that. Opinions are opinions and that is that. Fox news has Tucker Carlson for instance. Whatever he does is obviously opinion and has never been presented as news as far as i know. I think i have read him maybe 3 times and have never posted anything from him.

    The "news reporters" at CNN seem to often interject their opinions in what are supposed to be news stories and they are presented as news stories IMO.

    Also IMO, omission of news stories makes a news network just as un-factual as one who purposely lies about stories. Take CNN and their silence or delayed stories about Cuomo every step of the way for instance. They may have had something that i missed and i havent looked at them or Fox other than a quick scan for the last couple days but Cuomo giving preference to his family and friends on the vaccine is a big deal and it should have been reported on by them a week ago or whenever the story came out.

    Contrary to that, Fox was plenty critical of Trump at times and especially toward the end of his term.

    I am not opposed to looking at different news agencies but if whoever made that chart thinks that PBS and MSNBC belong at the top then i dont have much respect for the rest of it.

  24. #704
    creepycrawler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    The land of free bacon.
    Member #
    5806
    How come that every time the is a "reported" mass shooting and the shooter has an AR, its from the word go reported that the shooter had an "assault rifle" or "an AR style rifle" but in all of the ones where it wasn't an AR, nobody seems to have any idea what kind of weapon was used?

    Again, omission is the same as lying in my book.

    I hate that this happened but how is this a mass shooting when they happen so often in Chicago and Detroit and other areas and they aren't classified as mass shootings?


    From Fox News - Bryan, Texas mass shooting leaves at least one dead, others seriously injured, including state DPS officer
    Bryan, Texas mass shooting leaves at least one dead, others seriously injured, including state DPS officer

    https://www.foxnews.com/us/texas-bry...ical-condition

  25. #705

  26. #706
    Quote Originally Posted by creepycrawler View Post
    The "news reporters" at CNN seem to often interject their opinions in what are supposed to be news stories and they are presented as news stories IMO.
    I actually don't care to debate much of anything on CNN, either. I have previously said they are just as biased as Fox News, just to the left.

    Quote Originally Posted by creepycrawler View Post
    Also IMO, omission of news stories makes a news network just as un-factual as one who purposely lies about stories.
    There is always the possibility that when a more fact-based news org chooses not to follow a story, it's because they can't corroborate facts and sources behind the story.

    Quote Originally Posted by creepycrawler View Post
    Take CNN and their silence or delayed stories about Cuomo every step of the way for instance. They may have had something that i missed and i havent looked at them or Fox other than a quick scan for the last couple days but Cuomo giving preference to his family and friends on the vaccine is a big deal and it should have been reported on by them a week ago or whenever the story came out.
    Totally agree, and I don't think anyone's arguing with you over whether or not CNN is biased. CNN is very biased in my experience.

    Quote Originally Posted by creepycrawler View Post
    Contrary to that, Fox was plenty critical of Trump at times and especially toward the end of his term.
    To their credit, CNN has a whole section devoted to fact-checking, this is the the third one down: Fact check: Biden administration officials falsely describe infrastructure jobs estimate. But then again, as stated previously, I'm not here to defend CNN.

    - mike

  27. #707
    Quote Originally Posted by 74BuckinBronc View Post
    I don't think you understand what socialism is.

    The cheese isn't free, the production of the cheese is owned by the population as a whole and not a select, smaller number of cheese producers who profit off all the cheese consumers.

    Basically, under socialism, there is a much greater understanding and involvement among the entire populace of what it takes to make the cheese.

    - mike
    Last edited by sweater; April 9th, 2021 at 08:28 AM.

  28. #708
    Quote Originally Posted by sweater View Post
    I don't think you understand what socialism is.

    The cheese isn't free, the production of the cheese is owned by the population as a whole and not a select, smaller number of cheese producers who profit off all the cheese consumers.

    Basically, under socialism, there is a much greater understanding and involvement among the entire populace of what it takes to make the cheese.

    - mike
    I don't know that I agree with you. But do you think all those folks voting because "we get free stuff" know how to make the cheese??

  29. #709
    creepycrawler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    The land of free bacon.
    Member #
    5806
    Quote Originally Posted by sweater View Post
    To their credit, CNN has a whole section devoted to fact-checking, this is the the third one down: Fact check: Biden administration officials falsely describe infrastructure jobs estimate. But then again, as stated previously, I'm not here to defend CNN.

    - mike
    Yup, and i have quoted stuff from there in this very thread.

  30. #710
    Quote Originally Posted by 74BuckinBronc View Post
    I don't know that I agree with you. But do you think all those folks voting because "we get free stuff" know how to make the cheese??
    This is so simplistic as to be laughable. And it hasn't been proven out to be what motivates voters, not even close. Currently, the conservative rally cry is around fighting against socialism - which is so easily-shot down it's also laughable. Conservatives don't want to eradicate socialism at all because they are blowhards that don't understand wtf is going on.

    Or I think it's most likely that they know their supporters are ignorant enough to believe their lies.

    Instead of fighting against threats of socialism, conservatives should fight against actual real-life socialism that's currently destroying our country (let's take three examples):

    Social Security, you didn't save for retirement? Tough
    Republicans Are Pushing Myths About Social Security - To Justify Their Demands For Benefit Cuts (because you have to lie to your constituents to get cuts to SS in place)

    Farm subsidies, those f'n freeloaders
    Farmers Got Billions From Taxpayers In 2019, And Hardly Anyone Objected

    Medicare/Medicaid - f'n socialist freeloader sick people
    Trump and Republican Health Care Reform: The Republicans' Irrational Opposition to Medicaid (again, GOP has to deceive their constituents to try to push this agenda)

    All of these are examples where my cash that I earn is taken from me without choice and handed over to someone else. All three are redistribution of wealth and/or services.

    If conservatives had any backbone they'd take their case to the American people and work on getting at least those three large groups of freeloaders off the gov't tit.

    If you're not actively campaigning against the current threats of socialism that are already in place here in the US, you're a hypocrite.

    Also, we all understand that any conservative candidate that campaigns on trying to destroy Social Security, farm subsidies, and Medicare/Medicaid gets slaughtered at the polls. So keep yelling about "socialism" but at least get some candidates out in front that'll actually fight socialism.

    - mike
    Last edited by sweater; April 9th, 2021 at 11:34 AM. Reason: lots more detail

  31. #711
    I'm not laughing.... We can agree that there are MANY govt. programs that need some serious revising or dismissed altogether. You can add funding planned parenthood to the list and many others that I am probably not even aware of.

    Back to the point; I suppose we'd have to find stats comparing income with voting, but we can't know why they voted that way without interviewing them all.

  32. #712
    creepycrawler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    The land of free bacon.
    Member #
    5806
    Quote Originally Posted by sweater View Post
    Or I think it's most likely that they know their supporters are ignorant enough to believe their lies.

    Huh, that is exactly what we think about liberals.

  33. #713
    Quote Originally Posted by 74BuckinBronc View Post
    Back to the point; I suppose we'd have to find stats comparing income with voting
    Well, we do know that a ton of poor people aren't even getting to the ballot box. Poorer Americans have much lower voting rates in national elections than the nonpoor, a study finds.

    Quote Originally Posted by NY Times
    The study, by a Columbia University researcher, found that only 46 percent of potential voters with family incomes less than twice the federal poverty line voted in the 2016 presidential election, compared with 68 percent of those with family incomes above twice the poverty line.
    To address your insinuation that poor people vote Democrat to get free stuff, do we need to revisit what we've already been over in this very thread? We can go back over some of the analysis of that Nelson A. Rockefeller Institute of Government study:

    The federal system concentrates grants and funding to states with highest poverty rates for their residents, according to the report. The four major categories of federal spending examined and used in the balance-of-payment calculations are:

    • direct payments for individuals under programs such as Social Security and Medicare;

    • federal grants to state and local governments;

    • contracts and other federal procurement; and

    • wages of federal workers.

    Payments to individuals under the Social Security and Medicare programs are concentrated in states with large elderly populations, and states with large defense contracting sectors and more military bases get more federal defense spending. Federal wages are concentrated in states with a large federal employment presence, and has a significant impact on determining which states have the highest and lowest total per capita federal expenditures.
    Me, personally, I'm zeroing in on this part:

    The federal system concentrates grants and funding to states with highest poverty rates for their residents
    Long story short: states that vote conservative/Republican receive more in payments from the Fed than they give back, as measured by the poverty rates for their residents.

    Bunch of grifters, those conservatives.

    - mike
    Last edited by sweater; April 9th, 2021 at 12:37 PM.

  34. #714
    Clod Hopper's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    The Big Prairie, Colorado
    Member #
    816
    Images
    80

  35. #715
    Quote Originally Posted by Clod Hopper View Post
    That's a good article - but look, at least, at the top ten:

    1. Mississippi - close to 20% poverty rate. Wow.
    2. West Virginia
    3. Arkansas
    4. Louisiana
    5. New Mexico
    6. Alabama
    7. Kentucky
    8. Oklahoma
    9. South Carolina
    10. Tennessee - Poverty rate: 13.9%

    Those are some pretty conservative-voting states.

    - mike

  36. #716
    Clod Hopper's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    The Big Prairie, Colorado
    Member #
    816
    Images
    80
    We have been through this arguement over and over here. I get it, you gotta gripe against conservatives and any tiny ding you can find is hyped to prove evil intent. And I will say again, some of those states have lots of democrats too among the poor, many of the states have very little dense urban population, which also tends to push a state blue in voting, but also reduces available taxing to cover a wide area. Many of those states are ag or oil or other provider which other states like the benefits of, and blah blah, point after point. Most have been poor states their entire histories and the wash of money from wealthy states to these isnt all that extreme. But you go ahead and beat that drum.

    You never really come to a point beyond "conservative bad, see they no pay (enough) monies". You do recognize most of the redistribution programs were the brainchild of the non-conservatives, right?

  37. #717
    Wait... your whole thing is "libtards bad, they only want a handout", isn't that your jam, your point?

    Also did you donate your Trump/Biden stimmies by chance? Cause... socialism...



    Quote Originally Posted by Clod Hopper View Post
    We have been through this arguement over and over here. I get it, you gotta gripe against conservatives and any tiny ding you can find is hyped to prove evil intent. And I will say again, some of those states have lots of democrats too among the poor, many of the states have very little dense urban population, which also tends to push a state blue in voting, but also reduces available taxing to cover a wide area. Many of those states are ag or oil or other provider which other states like the benefits of, and blah blah, point after point. Most have been poor states their entire histories and the wash of money from wealthy states to these isnt all that extreme. But you go ahead and beat that drum.

    You never really come to a point beyond "conservative bad, see they no pay (enough) monies". You do recognize most of the redistribution programs were the brainchild of the non-conservatives, right?
    ****ing coward.
    Sweater
    Never play chess with a pigeon. The pigeon just knocks all the pieces over. Then craps all over the board. Then struts around like it won.

  38. #718
    Clod Hopper's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    The Big Prairie, Colorado
    Member #
    816
    Images
    80
    Quote Originally Posted by 1BGDOG View Post
    Wait... your whole thing is "libtards bad, they only want a handout", isn't that your jam, your point?

    Also did you donate your Trump/Biden stimmies by chance? Cause... socialism...

    You really are amazingly far off fact. You do you.

  39. #719

    Movin' on up!

    That was the title of the theme song of the Jeffersons. Google it if you're too young to remember the history of the Jeffersons or what that show represented.
    Anyway, apparently the BLM founder and avowed anti-capitalist Marxist Patrisse Cullors is also movin' on up. She just bought a nice little place up the canyon outside of LA. I wonder how a poor lady that grew up with a single mom in an impoverished neighborhood can afford a 1.4 million dollar home. Poverty pimp, race baiter, or capitalist would be my guess. And since she doesn't like capitalism that narrows it down a bit.

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-LA-hom e.html
    Last edited by SamFromCO; April 10th, 2021 at 11:29 AM.

  40. #720
    Real Estate Flippa Rex Ashton's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    DeeTeeCee
    Member #
    871
    Quote Originally Posted by SamFromCO View Post
    That was the title of the theme song of the Jeffersons. Google it if you're too young to remember the history of the Jeffersons or what that show represented.
    Anyway, apparently the BLM founder and avowed anti-capitalist Marxist Patrisse Cullors is also movin' on up. She just bought a nice little place up the canyon outside of LA. I wonder how a poor lady that grew up with a single mom in an impoverished neighborhood can afford a 1.4 million dollar home. Poverty pimp, race baiter, or capitalist would be my guess. And since she doesn't like capitalism that narrows it down a bit.

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-LA-hom e.html
    I remember that show The Jeffersons .... George Jefferson called a white person "honkey" in pretty much every episode and it was acceptable .... Racism was only 1-way even back then.

    ... didn't mean to wander off-topic .... please, carry on.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •