Mail bombs CR thread

[Hank Kingsley 21816]

1 minute ago, OatmealRaisinCookie said:

I agree; it's interesting to me that people can't see both sides are stupid and dishonest and instead try to vilify and nullify this by making "both sides" a bad word. If you have a team, you are a dumbass and it's irrespective of whatever team your confirmation and verification biases support.

BOOOOOOOTH SIIIIIIIIDES

[Guest]

Just now, Chuckie Finster said:

You're wrong.  I know you are going to dismiss me as some libtard cuck or whatever, but it is important to me that you know that you are indisputably wrong on this topic.  CNN tends to have anchors that lean left, yes, but it is in a whole different zip code than Fox News.

CNN is infotainment and not real news with respect to journalistic standards, integrity and reputation. It's just not, unless you think it is. Which is where we stand as a nation with free press. 

By the way, I agree, FoxNews is worse and hilariously stupid. It's the WWE of news, completely scripted and fake whereas CNN is more of a fixed game by the refs masquerading as a legitimate game.

[Guest]

2 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

I'm an Economist man, myself. 

lol, okay.

The Economist is great for those with the time and energy and good for you if this is true, it's just comical because your internet persona/personality just screams the opposite of this.

Edited October 25, 2018 by Guest

[SuingToGetAMessageBoard? 3875]

4 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Slants are fine, especially if you go in with eyes wide open.  

No racist.

[Homercles 10206]

So how do we feel npr slants? I listen to them extensively in the car and they will often quote a politician, then calmly state a fact that counters or supports that quote and move on without additional commentary.

In the case of our president, this happens almost daily and consistently states the case of how outlandish/deceitful/lying his statement was. All without bashing on the ‘man’.

[Brisketexan 107043]

4 minutes ago, OatmealRaisinCookie said:

lol, okay.

The Economist is great for those with the time and energy and good for you if this is true, it's just comical because your internet persona/personality just screams the opposite of this.

Really?  Pick up an issue every once in a while.  Pretty much every single thing I've said about Trump and Trumpism also has been written in the Economist.  The Economist has not been shy about characterizing the risk to our Republic and to the existing "Liberal" order that has brought unprecedented peace and prosperity to the globe, and noting directly that this risk is presented by authoritarian, populist/nationalist idiocy.  Seriously, my takes on those issues are better than 90% aligned with the Economist.

I'm not an alarmist.

This shit is objectively ALARMING.  If the Economist is ringing that alarm, maybe you should wake the fuck up and realize what it means.

[Guest]

3 minutes ago, Hank Kingsley said:

BOOOOOOOTH SIIIIIIIIDES

lol hot take alert:

I reject the "both sides" disqualification and in fact think "both sides" is the most honest argument and approach to modern day politics, meaning it's best to go third party and carve out a new reality.

In the times of the two party system where Whigs and Democrats were the two idiotic, both sides horribleness, a third party candidate did just the aforementioned and actually won!

That man's name was ALFRED EINSTEIN  ABRAM LINCOLNS and that party was the DEMOCRATICS!

[SuingToGetAMessageBoard? 3875]

Just now, Homercles said:

So how do we feel npr slants? I listen to them extensively in the car and they will often quote a politician, then calmly state a fact that counters or supports that quote and move on without additional commentary.

In the case of our president, this happens almost daily and consistently states the case of how outlandish/deceitful/lying his statement was. All without bashing on the ‘man’.

It's a matter of story choice, not truth.  Their topics tend to be left-friendly.

[David Dennison 19571]

2 minutes ago, tjhooker said:

There are some very questionable "neutral" sources in that gray circle. NPR? LOL

Fine.

What do you consider to be a neutral source for news?

[Brisketexan 107043]

1 minute ago, tjhooker said:

There are some very questionable "neutral" sources in that gray circle. NPR? LOL

It's referencing the news reporting of that outlet.  Yes, NPR carries a two hour long program about how a hippie commune in Oregon makes everything out of hemp, etc..  But NPR NEWS reporting is actually amazingly balanced.  I love the fact that they get appearances from political leaders (of "both sides,") and the routine is to offer the leader a chance to deliver his planned message, including a softball or two to prompt the answer, and then a question that effectively directly quotes an adversary -- like "your critics say that this plan would increase the deficit -- what is your response to that?"  I honestly get more information from a 3 minute NPR conversation with Wilbur Ross than I get from any other source.  I get a snapshot of what he's thinking and what his position is, and I get to hear how he defends/justifies it in the face of criticism.  It's a mini direct and cross examination exercise.

I recognize that these days, fact-based-reporting is seen as having a liberal bias, but that's the whole fucking problem that we're talking about.  Your definition of objective is so fucking skewed that there's little point in even discussing the subject.

[SimonBolivar 11068]

11 minutes ago, tjhooker said:

Fox is very open about their bias.  

It's only been a year since they dropped the "Fair and Balanced" tagline and NPR news is fantastic.

Edited October 25, 2018 by SimonBolivar

[Brisketexan 107043]

4 minutes ago, SuingToGetAMessageBoard? said:

It's a matter of story choice, not truth.  Their topics tend to be left-friendly.

Seriously?  Again, I'm talking about their news programming.  The Admin imposes new tariffs.  That's an objectively newsworthy story.  NPR has Wilbur Ross call in to discuss the tariffs -- why does the admin think these are helpful?  Critics say they will cause negative effect X -- what's your response?

I mean, I'm sorry that the forces of Trumpism repeatedly step on their dicks in newsworthy ways, and the more "right-friendly" approach would be to have the decency to not even bring them up, but come on.  Trump says he's going to pass a massive middle class tax cut by November, and it's not a "left-leaning" story to ask "ok....how?"  But that's seen as an attack on Trump.  I'm sorry that he's such a fucking moron that he has no idea how our system of government works, what a calendar is, or anything of that sort, but that doesn't mean that reporting on a newsworthy item -- President promises middle class tax cut -- is a left-leaning exercise.

 

[Guest]

4 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

It's referencing the news reporting of that outlet.  Yes, NPR carries a two hour long program about how a hippie commune in Oregon makes everything out of hemp, etc..  But NPR NEWS reporting is actually amazingly balanced.  I love the fact that they get appearances from political leaders (of "both sides,") and the routine is to offer the leader a chance to deliver his planned message, including a softball or two to prompt the answer, and then a question that effectively directly quotes an adversary -- like "your critics say that this plan would increase the deficit -- what is your response to that?"  I honestly get more information from a 3 minute NPR conversation with Wilbur Ross than I get from any other source.  I get a snapshot of what he's thinking and what his position is, and I get to hear how he defends/justifies it in the face of criticism.  It's a mini direct and cross examination exercise.

I recognize that these days, fact-based-reporting is seen as having a liberal bias, but that's the whole fucking problem that we're talking about.  Your definition of objective is so fucking skewed that there's little point in even discussing the subject.

NPR is fantastic and I agree with your take.

CNN is just not in that same category and fact-based reporting isn't in the methodology for CNN; they are entertainment and for profit and it's confounding how otherwise smart, intelligent, liberal people will hold CNN up as real news on the same level as your aforementioned NPR, etc.

Edited October 25, 2018 by Guest

[Brisketexan 107043]

Just now, OatmealRaisinCookie said:

NPR is fantastic and I agree with your take.

CNN is just not in that same category and fact-based reporting isn't in the methodology for CNN; they are entertainment and for profit and it's confounding how otherwise smart, intelligent, liberal people will hold CNN up as real news on the same level as your aforementioned NPR, etc.

I don't hold them up on the same level as NPR.  Nice straw man.  

See the fucking chart I posted.  CNN is in about the right place, which isn't the most flattering location for them.

[Biff Tannen 46208]

Just now, Brisketexan said:

I don't hold them up on the same level as NPR.  Nice straw man.  

See the fucking chart I posted.  CNN is in about the right place, which isn't the most flattering location for them.

I would say Daily Beast and National Review are way too high in that chart.

[Guest]

3 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

I don't hold them up on the same level as NPR.  Nice straw man.  

See the fucking chart I posted.  CNN is in about the right place, which isn't the most flattering location for them.

I apologize then, not you. But the others who do (and explicitly said so on this thread earlier as a legitimate news source versus infotainment play).

[Hank Kingsley 21816]

26 minutes ago, SuingToGetAMessageBoard? said:

I think we are all very aware of "why people on the right are so distrustful of the media."  

 

Here's an exercise for you:  every time something politically good happens for the right, go to TexAgs and see which links are posted.  Every single time you will see NYTimes, WaPo, BBC, AP, Reuters.  The right knows what news is.  They just have developed a good mechanism to protect their brain from it when they want.

QFT.

 

[F250 29210]

14 minutes ago, tjhooker said:

There are some very questionable "neutral" sources in that gray circle. NPR? LOL

I don't think neutral means what you think it means.

[Brisketexan 107043]

4 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

I would say Daily Beast and National Review are way too high in that chart.

Probably true.  Daily Beast has never been particularly solid.  But it's been a shame to watch the National Review go from a voice of rational conservatism (which it remained, even in the early days of Trumpism), to sliding further and further into the "defend Trump and Trumpism at all costs" camp.  They've ended up taking some pretty silly positions, and engaging in sloppy reporting, all in service of the mission of supporting team Trump.  Which, sadly, I get.  The GOP is the party of Trump now.  Get on board, or lose all your subscribers.

['stache 22148]

30 minutes ago, tjhooker said:

If you believe CNN shoots down the middle and isnt biased in their coverage then you will never understand why people on the right as so distrustful of the media.  I can admit Fox News is biased but I also see all the other cable news networks severely slanted the other way.  There literally isnt "news" anymore on TV just commentary.  

Bull-fucking-shit.  Their opinion talking heads may lean left, but news is news.  When they report on what the president says and does and it makes him look bad, he calls it "fake news."  It's real news he just doesn't like it.  When they report that Robert Muller is investigating collusion with Russia, that's real fucking news.  Just because your Dear Leader doesn't like it doesn't make it fake.  Again, I'm not talking about the talking heads, I'm talking about the fucking news.  Conveying of world events and things that are actually happening.  Fox News doesn't do that, everything is slanted.  MSNBC is the counterpart.  CNN conveys mostly news.  The people may vote democrat, but what the fuck does that matter?  Even their opinion talking heads are much more centered than Fox or MSNBC.  The fact that you and your type continue preaching this nonsense is why idiots are sending bombs and the fucking president of the united states has become immune to facts because his mouthbreathing followers just don't give a shit except for "lib tears."

[shnsajax 3607]

That doesn't even include Sinclair Broadcast Group.

[Brisketexan 107043]

29 minutes ago, SuingToGetAMessageBoard? said:

I think we are all very aware of "why people on the right are so distrustful of the media."  

 

Here's an exercise for you:  every time something politically good happens for the right, go to TexAgs and see which links are posted.  Every single time you will see NYTimes, WaPo, BBC, AP, Reuters.  The right knows what news is.  They just have developed a good mechanism to protect their brain from it when they want.

And I'll quote it again, just because it's so spot-on.  Yep, when the Trumpists want to cite real authority for objective facts (that happen to support their team), they cite a REAL source, and they know what those sources are.

It all comes down to the fact that reporting objectively and truthfully can't help but make Trump and Trumpism look like drooling moronity, because THAT'S WHAT IT IS.  And the Trumpists call that unaltered mirror, reflecting EXACTLY what they are, "liberal bias."  No, dude.  You're just that fucking ugly.

[Bozo_Casanova 26911]

31 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

I'm an Economist man, myself. 

Me too - weekly skimming for 25+ years. 

['stache 22148]

24 minutes ago, tjhooker said:

There are some very questionable "neutral" sources in that gray circle. NPR? LOL

Oh lawd, that NPR, reporting things the president says and does and facts that Dear Leader doesn't like.   What a librul rag, FAKE NEWS!!!!!!!  Maybe they need a bombing too.

[SuingToGetAMessageBoard? 3875]

you just lit the b_t bat-signal.  "denying reality to own the libs."

[Pancho 46378]

 

['stache 22148]

5 minutes ago, tjhooker said:

Holy shit I triggered you.  LOL

Yep.  No need for truth.  Just librul snowflakes being triggered by the swaths of idiots who don't fucking care about truth anymore.  Just let it go, bro!

['stache 22148]

3 minutes ago, tjhooker said:

Were you blaming Hillary, Waters and Holder when Ricin was being sent to the WH and Pentagon a few weeks ago?  I dont remember the media losing their shit like they are now.  Interesting to say the least.

When did any of those people publicly support violence against their political rivals or the media?

Oh yeah, he was just joking.  No big deal.

[Mojo Hand 4580]

45 minutes ago, tjhooker said:

If you believe CNN shoots down the middle and isnt biased in their coverage then you will never understand why people on the right as so distrustful of the media.  I can admit Fox News is biased but I also see all the other cable news networks severely slanted the other way.  There literally isnt "news" anymore on TV just commentary.  

I love how you idiots think that you are just such deep and complicated thinkers that nobody can understand you.   Just like an aggy — from the inside, you can't explain it; from the outside, you can't understand it.   We all understand exactly what is going on.   Even GOP leaders are laughing at you behind your back, while they spout the bullshit that you bite on hook, line, and sinker.

[4th&Five 42027]

Just now, tjhooker said:

Name calling, broad generalities, painting with a broad brush and flat out emotional.  I'm guessing your Xanax Rx ran out this week?

are you describing trump?

[David Dennison 19571]

10 minutes ago, tjhooker said:

Were you blaming Hillary, Waters and Holder when Ricin was being sent to the WH and Pentagon a few weeks ago?  I dont remember the media losing their shit like they are now.  Interesting to say the least.

Probably because no one actually sent ricin to the White House or the Pentagon.

['stache 22148]

2 minutes ago, tjhooker said:

No, stache but it is ironic.

Lol, you can't even see the irony.  Everyone just stop being so emotional.  Everything's fine.

[F250 29210]

23 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

I would say Daily Beast and National Review are way too high in that chart.

National Review seems to be about right. It is an editorial magazine and they are upfront about the conservative interpretation they are taking. They interpret the news from a slanted perspective but they don't butcher facts.

[SuingToGetAMessageBoard? 3875]

1 minute ago, F250 said:

National Review seems to be about right. It is an editorial magazine and they are upfront about the conservative interpretation they are taking. They interpret the news from a slanted perspective but they don't butcher facts.

William Buckley is dead.  That NR is long gone.

 

The previous page on this very thread is the discussion of the out and out lie about the pipe bomb in National Review article.  It's incredible watching people's brains enter bunker mode.

[4th&Five 42027]

 

[NowThis 931]

that chart upthread is really accurate

CNN is slightly leftist, but gives lots of airtime to conservative pundits

MSNBC is fringe left

Fox is far right, rarely gives an opposing viewpoint, and opposing guests are shouted down, ridiculed, insulted and outnumbered 5 to 1. It's WWF for the deplorables. 

[Biff Tannen 46208]

10 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

Probably because no one actually sent ricin to the White House or the Pentagon.

I was out of the country for a while, but did this really happen?

[GSU&UT 1799]

If NPR has a liberal lean then they sure do a good job trying to get "Trump supporters sitting in a diner in 2018" quotes constantly where these people are literally being hurt by the tax cut and tariffs but almost always say "I still support him." If they were hardcore liberal like me, I'd tell these people they were fucking stupid to their face. I love NPR, but they suffer from the same problem the NYT does which is that sometimes they're entirely too worried about being called liberal leaning that they go out of their way to find people who still blame Obama/Hillary for things Trump is responsible for.

Edited October 25, 2018 by GSU&UT

[David Dennison 19571]

Just now, GSU&UT said:

If NPR has a liberal lean then they sure do a good job trying to get "Trump supporters sitting in a diner in 2018" quotes constantly where these people are literally being hurt by the tax cut and tariffs but almost always say "I still support him." If they were hardcore liberal like me, I'd tell these people they were fucking stupid to their face. I love NPR, but they suffered from the same problem the NYT does which is that sometimes they're entirely too worried about being called liberal leaning that they go out of their way to people who still blame Obama/Hillary for things Trump is responsible for.

This is how you know it's about race solidarity.

[hobbes2702 13513]

54 minutes ago, tjhooker said:

There are some very questionable "neutral" sources in that gray circle. NPR? LOL

You have an issue with NPR? How do you people even survive through the day with this kind of brain power

[GSU&UT 1799]

3 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

This is how you know it's about race solidarity.

I have to turn it off because you know god damn good and well every one of those people would have been calling for Obama to be killed if they experienced the same sort of financial hurt because of him.

[David Dennison 19571]

Just now, tjhooker said:

You guys are talking to me like I am some idiot.  This might blow your mind because I am pretty sure by the response here anyone you guys if someone in anyway believe things counter to your thought structure is an idiot.  I have a degree from UT in Gov't and have worked in politics for a portion of my life before I wanted to make real money and not deal with the bullshit.  I am not an uneducated and believe it or not I am feel well educated on what I am talking about.  There is a reason I don't post in CR much because it is a shit show.  I'll hang up and listen.

This is exactly what the right wing echo chamber peddles to its followers. 

[David Dennison 19571]

Just now, tjhooker said:

Not sure if serious but I will take the bait.  Yes and amazingly the coverage was nothing like today.  I know it is shocking.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/02/us/politics/ricin-pentagon-mail-poisoning.html

That is an old article.

No one sent ricin to anyone. The dude sent threats and harmless ground up castor beans. 

[Hank Scorpio 17924]

3 minutes ago, tjhooker said:

You guys are talking to me like I am some idiot.  This might blow your mind because I am pretty sure by the response here anyone you guys if someone in anyway believe things counter to your thought structure is an idiot.  I have a degree from UT in Gov't and have worked in politics for a portion of my life before I wanted to make real money and not deal with the bullshit.  I am not an uneducated and believe it or not I am feel well educated on what I am talking about.  There is a reason I don't post in CR much because it is a shit show.  I'll hang up and listen.

Oh my god. This man is brilliant. Everyone listen!

[hobbes2702 13513]

5 minutes ago, tjhooker said:

You guys are talking to me like I am some idiot.  This might blow your mind because I am pretty sure by the response here anyone you guys if someone in anyway believe things counter to your thought structure is an idiot.  I have a degree from UT in Gov't and have worked in politics for a portion of my life before I wanted to make real money and not deal with the bullshit.  I am not an uneducated and believe it or not I am feel well educated on what I am talking about.  There is a reason I don't post in CR much because it is a shit show.  I'll hang up and listen.

People are talking to you like an idiot because you’re being obtuse. You ignore reason and fact in favor of bluster and hyperbole. Take your sanctimony and fuck off if you can’t handle critical analysis of your inaccurate premise.

[Mdhorn 6166]

57 minutes ago, SuingToGetAMessageBoard? said:

It's a matter of story choice, not truth.  Their topics tend to be left-friendly.

This is just another faucet of the both sides argument.  They know their news is ass, wrong and willfully ignorant but  both sides.  Play that game with them if you want but it's another way for them to dodge responsibility.  One Left snowball of untruth justifies daily avalanches of Republican bullshit. 

[David Dennison 19571]

Just now, tjhooker said:

Yes, it was another idiot just like the idiot sending these pipe bombs.  

And widely reported, as evidenced by a quick search on the internets.

[NowThis 931]

2 minutes ago, Mdhorn said:

This is just another faucet of the both sides argument.  They know their news is ass, wrong and willfully ignorant but  both sides.  Play that game with them if you want but it's another way for them to dodge responsibility.  One Left snowball of untruth justifies daily avalanches of Republican bullshit. 

indeed, complicated plumbing. 

['stache 22148]

There also was no "false flag" accusations there.  If the right could just control themselves for a minute this would blow over (unless one actually explodes, god forbid).

[wildcat09 29601]

9 minutes ago, tjhooker said:

You guys are talking to me like I am some idiot.  This might blow your mind because I am pretty sure by the response here anyone you guys if someone in anyway believe things counter to your thought structure is an idiot.  I have a degree from UT in Gov't and have worked in politics for a portion of my life before I wanted to make real money and not deal with the bullshit.  I am not an uneducated and believe it or not I am feel well educated on what I am talking about.  There is a reason I don't post in CR much because it is a shit show.  I'll hang up and listen.

Next you'll tell us that you have a very high IQ.