Political Thread Of Fail And AIDS (Geeto ahead!)

[Geeto67]

CNN is a sinking ship and it's awesome. Their moron President Jeff Zucker has ruined them because of his own personal agenda :lolguy:

 

For someone who dislikes CNN so much, you care an awful lot about it. Who the fuck cares? Oh that's right, you can't have moral superiority over the "crooked liberal media" without an actual villain....carry on.

[BStowers023]

For someone who dislikes CNN so much, you care an awful lot about it. Who the fuck cares? Oh that's right, you can't have moral superiority over the "crooked liberal media" without an actual villain....carry on.

 

What the fuck are you talking about? Liberalism is a disease. CNN is one of the root causes of the disease.

[Geeto67]

Liberalism is a disease

 

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-7II3dJcYbfg/UMMTGWIKslI/AAAAAAAADvc/Um69JqRY-Yg/s1600/dr-evil-laughing.gif

 

have you been reading Michael Savage again?

 

If that were really true, then how you treat the sick and handicapped suffering from this "disease" would really make you some kind of awful a-moral monster, now wouldn't it? Fortunately for you it isn't true.

 

you know how I often say you are contributing to the problem and you don't seem to understand? This is what I mean, you remove the humanity of your opponents so as to be dismissive on the whole of their viewpoint. There is no middle ground for you, there is only your position and fuck everything. No wonder you are so miserable politically.

 

I will concede that "extremism" can be fostered by certain types of mental afflictions but it affects people in a politically neutral way (an extreme liberal and extreme conservative are the same in their extremism even though the political position is different). However, considering fairly moderate people extremist while thinking your own extreme ideas are reasonable are also signs of paranoia and other afflictions so.....draw your own conclusions.

 

What the fuck are you talking about? Liberalism is a disease. CNN is one of the root causes of the disease.

 

I am fairly certain "liberal politics" existed before television, which would let CNN off the hook for being the "root cause". I mean this is really just nonsense. It is one thing to say it is propagandist, it is a wild leap of faith to call them the root cause. I don't know that I would even call them propagandist, just biased favoring entertainment (infotainment) rather than informative.

[10phone2]

Part of my Job involves reading a lot of government issued bulletins on specific financial market issues, so a good amount of my time is researching stuff related to that and the various rabbit holes I fall down while doing that.

 

However, I do have a running list of sources I tend to trust better than anybody and a few that I read regularly.

 

Sources I consume regularly and for the most part trust:

- NYTimes

- WSJ

- NPR

- BBC

- The Atlantic

- The Economist

- Kipplingers

- Bloomberg

- Forbes

- Politico

- ontheissues.org (when I am working with a particular political district and I need a starting place to see what the environment is and can look up the sitting politicians there and then research more).

 

 

Sources I consume regularly and distrust or understand that it is opinion or has bias:

- Fox news (via website)

- Anything political Jalopnik cross posts

- the New Yorker (although unlike the others here I respect)

- Any Paper's editorial section

- The National Review Online

 

I tend to look at sources and how they handle and enforce the Society of Professional Journalists Code of ethics:

http://www.spj.org/ethicscode.asp

 

 

Outside of the liberal vs conservative banter, this was an actual good list of resources and wanted to say thanks.

[Geeto67]

Outside of the liberal vs conservative banter, this was an actual good list of resources and wanted to say thanks.

 

you are welcome. I was kind of hoping to foster a discussion that adds to this list and would hope people would talk about some other sources and why they like them.

 

I was hoping there were some National Review fans on here - it really is in intelligent magazine and one that holds to it's conservative roots (founded by William F Buckley one of the fathers of modern free market conservatism) and motto of "Free Market, Free People" but I sometimes find that it makes assumptions that evidence doesn't always support or omits certain opposing arguments because they are too difficult to address. this article is a good example of this:

 

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/449232/conservatives-face-discrimination-colleges-keith-finks-ucla-case

 

it doesn't talk about the political differences in different fields of academic study and chooses to address the whole of education as being inherently left biased (which I don't actually think is true, although the evidence is murky to prove either point). It implies that schools make politically biased decisions in hiring and firing when there are studies out there that address this topic, and it draws a conclusion from a Harvard law study that I don't think the study supports. It also relies on a few anecdotes. It's a well crafted argument and very intelligent but it's bias is clear. I would love to know how those who read this stuff reconcile these issues, or do they even see them? I get that it is an editorial piece rather than expose journalism, but that doesn't diminish it's value any in understanding another side's point.

[wagner]

https://www.facebook.com/SteveMilneNews/videos/1379295402185619/

[BStowers023]

Lol I like how serious and defensive you got. Being honest for a minute, extreme lefties and righties are both wackos. I know I've said this before. The lefties are the ones with the louder voice CURRENTLY. I know it changes and has it's cycles, but since it's relevant currently, then that's what I'm going to mention.

 

It' kind of funny though if you look at the definition if Liberal

lib·er·al

ˈlib(ə)rəl/Submit

adjective

1.open to new behavior or opinions and willing to discard traditional values.

 

Most liberals of today are literally the complete opposite of that definition (at least the open to new opinions part). We need a new name for them

[10phone2]

https://www.facebook.com/SteveMilneNews/videos/1379295402185619/

 

btw waggs. I'm sure you were thrilled how your donk video was used on yellowbullet. good lard.

[wagner]

btw waggs. I'm sure you were thrilled how your donk video was used on yellowbullet. good lard.

 

I never saw that, writing the story on the video after I found it was painful enough.

 

The only time I go into Trash Or Be Trashed is to post about our live feeds, otherwise, I stay out of that mess. Those guys there are brutal and take no prisoners, ever.

[10phone2]

It was no fault of your own honestly. The Trash or Be Trashed section is sort of like watching wwf from the 80's.

[Geeto67]

Lol I like how serious and defensive you got.

 

Because there are people who do believe that, and not in the abstract, people here, in Columbus, possibly on this forum. And it's a shitty thing to say about people in general - to treat political opinion like its a mental disorder. It's like calling someone retarded, and not in that "friendly way" joking with your friends - more like that "cut you off in traffic" way.

 

And honestly, I am just tired of you bitching about CNN when you really do just get your news from your facebook feed and not from any identifiable credible source.

 

 

Being honest for a minute, extreme lefties and righties are both wackos. I know I've said this before. The lefties are the ones with the louder voice CURRENTLY. I know it changes and has it's cycles, but since it's relevant currently, then that's what I'm going to mention.

 

you are only talking about "extremes" and never about the middle ground. It's tiring. Also you are only concerned with people and stereotypes, not the actual issues at hand. you don't really want to talk economics, or foreign policy, just about how stupid "x" people are for their position on economics or foreign policy. ok we get it you are conservative and you don't like liberals, can you say something of substance now or is it just going to be more of "my team is awesome and yours sucks". the choice is yours. if you don't know enough about issues, then start learning about them.

 

Actually I think I can help with this....if you want to know a metric fuckton about the constitution and the basic principles of government this is probably the best book going right now:

https://www.amazon.com/Constitutional-Law-Principles-Policies-Treatise/dp/0735598975

 

my advice, check it out from the library and read it. I'd lend you my copy but it's 1000+ pages so I doubt I would ever see it again. Don't read it all at once, pick a chapter and take like a month to get through it, then give it a rest and pick a different one.

 

 

 

It' kind of funny though if you look at the definition if Liberal

lib·er·al

ˈlib(ə)rəl/Submit

adjective

1.open to new behavior or opinions and willing to discard traditional values.

 

Most liberals of today are literally the complete opposite of that definition (at least the open to new opinions part). We need a new name for them

 

You picked the wrong definition of liberal or rather you are trying to apply a word that has multiple meanings in the way that it is least suited to so you can couple it to your generalization about a large class of people based on the perceived actions of a few. You understand one word can have multiple meanings, right? I mean I don't have to explain how dictionaries, context, and syntax work, do I? The definitions you want, or rather the ones that actual define something instead of your interpretation so you can shit on something, are:

 

http://www.dictionary.com/browse/liberal

 

liberal

[lib-er-uh l, lib-ruh l]

 

adjective

1. favorable to progress or reform, as in political or religious affairs.

 

2. (often initial capital letter) noting or pertaining to a political party advocating measures of progressive political reform.

 

3. of, pertaining to, based on, or advocating liberalism, especially the freedom of the individual and governmental guarantees of individual rights and liberties.

 

4.favorable to or in accord with concepts of maximum individual freedom possible, especially as guaranteed by law and secured by governmental protection of civil liberties.

 

5.favoring or permitting freedom of action, especially with respect to matters of personal belief or expression: a liberal policy toward dissident artists and writers.

 

6.of or relating to representational forms of government rather than aristocracies and monarchies.

 

...

 

11. not strict or rigorous; free; not literal:

a liberal interpretation of a rule.

 

[BStowers023]

Because there are people who do believe that, and not in the abstract, people here, in Columbus, possibly on this forum. And it's a shitty thing to say about people in general - to treat political opinion like its a mental disorder. It's like calling someone retarded, and not in that "friendly way" joking with your friends - more like that "cut you off in traffic" way.

 

If you were in the call with me and someone blatantly cut me off and I called them a retard, would that actually offend you?

 

 

And honestly, I am just tired of you bitching about CNN when you really do just get your news from your facebook feed and not from any identifiable credible source.

 

Assumptions?

 

 

you are only talking about "extremes" and never about the middle ground. It's tiring. Also you are only concerned with people and stereotypes, not the actual issues at hand. you don't really want to talk economics, or foreign policy, just about how stupid "x" people are for their position on economics or foreign policy. ok we get it you are conservative and you don't like liberals, can you say something of substance now or is it just going to be more of "my team is awesome and yours sucks". the choice is yours. if you don't know enough about issues, then start learning about them.

 

You fuckwit, I literally just stated both extremes are wackos. Reading comprehension > You

 

I am conservative, yes. If there is any extreme side I'm on it certainly isn't the general "republican conservative stereotype" side. \

 

A few things I believe in that will prove I'm more "middle ground" than you think.

-I'm not religious and I don't think the church should have any say in politics.

-I am for a flat tax

-I am against income tax and believe there should just be a sales/consumption tax

-I am pro-choice but I don't think any tax payer money should go towards funding abortion

-I am pro-legalization of Marijuana and pro-decriminalization of drug users and abusers.

-I am not a statist who believes the Government should have control or say in our social lives.

-I am pro-gay marriage

-I think there should be term limits

-I think there should be more of a free-market healthcare system, but continue to provide medicare/medicade to the most needy families.

-I am pro-gun rights but I think we need to continue to improve our background checks for gun buyers.

-I am pro-free speech regardless of what speech even if I don't agree with it.

 

There are just some of my views on some common political issues. I would say that's pretty middle ground if you ask me.

[wagner]

https://bluelivesmatter.blue/video-bill-clark-boone-county-sheriff/

[Furloaf]

https://bluelivesmatter.blue/video-bill-clark-boone-county-sheriff/

 

What gets me is he wrote it up differently, in a manner trying to show he was more of a fucktard than reality.

[wagner]

What gets me is he wrote it up differently, in a manner trying to show he was more of a fucktard than reality.

 

Just shows how journalism works in this new world. Why be correct when you can write something that fits the narrative and gets people riled up.

[Geeto67]

Just shows how journalism works in this new world. Why be correct when you can write something that fits the narrative and gets people riled up.

 

Yes because some schmuck in a small local paper is representatives of all journalism nationally. :dumb:

[Geeesammy]

Yes because some schmuck in a small local paper is representatives of all journalism nationally. :dumb:

 

Your right, most journalism isnt the mild, it's far worse.

 

Fuck I mean Clintion News Network blackmailed a redditor

[Geeto67]

Your right, most journalism isnt the mild, it's far worse.

 

Fuck I mean Clintion News Network blackmailed a redditor

 

[Geeesammy]

What's funny is that is 99.9% of cr's response when you post

[Geeto67]

What's funny is that is 99.9% of cr's response when you post

 

I don't know why a small part of me thought that even you would find that funny, but nope....butt hurt again. is there any part of you that is not sad?

[BStowers023]

CNN is trash. I guess what disappoints me is that it actually used to be a credible source of information. Now they've got a clear and obvious agenda because their cuck boy CEO has some personal vendetta against Trump so he risked the entire network to get his point across

[l36tols1]

I guess the saying is true "The apple doesn't fall far from the tree" This idiot tweeted e-mails with proof of Russian involvement in the election.

 

https://nyti.ms/2u4ES2T

 

http://www.npr.org/2017/07/11/536648394/emails-show-trump-jr-knew-russia-was-working-to-support-trump-campaign

 

But... I can almost bet that nothing happens of this.

[zeitgeist57]

I guess the saying is true "The apple doesn't fall far from the tree" This idiot tweeted e-mails with proof of Russian involvement in the election.

 

https://nyti.ms/2u4ES2T

 

http://www.npr.org/2017/07/11/536648394/emails-show-trump-jr-knew-russia-was-working-to-support-trump-campaign

 

But... I can almost bet that nothing happens of this.

 

Trump supporters will focus on the attorney NOT being a "foreign national", or that no material information was exchanged.

 

The fact that T Jr. tweeted the exchange?

 

http://i0.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/000/559/963/385.gif

[Geeto67]

Clay....that gif made my day.

 

Dirty Politics is dirty politics, they all play this game to a degree and honestly the only thing that really sucks is just how shockingly bad at it DT really is at playing the game, and look at how little the world supports him.

[Mallard]

Trump supporters will focus on the attorney NOT being a "foreign national", or that no material information was exchanged.

 

The fact that T Jr. tweeted the exchange?

 

http://i0.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/000/559/963/385.gif

What shocks me is that he only tweeted them so he could beat the NYT to the punch. But now that admits to his base that what the NYT is reporting is legit, and he can't cry "fake news."

 

Sent from my SM-G925V using Tapatalk