Exactly. It is like the bible thumper that says the bible is true and infallible because the bible says so. For me it makes no difference who tells me the sky is blue. The color of the sky has nothing to do with their credibility.
What Americans really think.
- Thread starter Walter
- Start date
Exactly. It is like the bible thumper that says the bible is true and infallible because the bible says so. For me it makes no difference who tells me the sky is blue. The color of the sky has nothing to do with their credibility.
To you, perhaps. Whatever I see or read in a reputable source (CNN, CBC, BBC, New York Times etc.), I assume it to be true unless proved otherwise. Whatever I see or read on a disreputable source (FOX News, Washington Times, worldnetdaily etc.) I assume to be false unless proved otherwise.
I'm not making excuses, but I would assume that the Obama's 'people' would be responsible for picking appropriate gifts for guests or at least making recommendations. Is it possible that the Brown's exceeded protocol. I mean, who gave Fergie and what's his name beaver coats when they came here?
Anyway, I have no idea how that works, just something that crossed my mind.
Forget the so called reputable sources, try coming up with your own conclusions, the sky maybe really green as you see it. (just picked a color, no hidden meaning) The others maybe trying to convince you otherwise for some ulterior motive. In today's media, nothing is reliable take NY Times for example. Please keep in mind as I mentioned earlier that in my opinion the media won the elections, not the candidates. Nothing is more accurate as to the facts than what you believe, not what someone else believes. (you could be wrong, but are they right?)
Since when is the NY Times reliable? They get caught all the time false reporting and plagarising. I suppose if they print what you want to read it makes them more reliable?
Basically you like news media with a liberal slant and dislike news media with a center/conservative slant.
Liberal Media- Reputable and ok
Conservative- Disreputable and false
Right now I am thinking that I really do not want to do my weekly status report for work in case your guys were wondering.
It's kind of like the part of the job that is boring. It doesn't take long but I always put it off.
That's a stunning statement. You might as well say you restrict your sources of information that you use to form opinions to those outlets that are going to confirm your predisposed beliefs. You pride yourself on being an ultra-liberal (as indicated in your posts) but at the same time you might be among the most narrow minded people on the forum. Now that I think about it, I guess there's no reason why you could not be an ultra-liberal and extremely narrow minded at the same time. Not being able to see the other person's point of view is something I probably would have associated with the far right, but you're more or less pointing out that liberals can be just as blindly lost in your ideology as well.
Last edited:
One might think a well-read fellow as yourself would read from several sources and form your own opinion. That opinion might be somewhat jaded if all you'll view is the "yes-man" gazette....
That depends on what you mean by, "reputable" and "well-established"? You have to say by who's standards. If you were to ask a Wall Street financier (as in, somebody who's primary aspiration in life is make ever larger amounts of money), the NYT is an objective paper (perhaps even "liberal"). If you were to ask Noam Chomsky (as in, among the greatest intellectuals alive today), he'd say that all of the above sources (both "conservative" and "liberal") fall under the category of "very biased" in favour of the establishment in the United States.
But hey, at least Fox just comes out and admits what it is; Americans watch Fox because it's entertaining and occasionally very mildly informative. CNN is more or less the same thing but aimed at higher income bracket viewers (read: more snobbish).
Being sceptical is fine but how long before you can't trust any source? Using a little bit of common sense should sort things out for you. Just don't place your trust in someone based mainly on the fact that many other people do so. It all depends on whether what that someone is saying follows (i.e. stands to reason).
So if someone tells you something that is reasonable but happens to conflict with your reputable source, give them the benefit of the doubt anyway. And if someone says something totally unreasonable, you shouldn't need sources to see that.
Please keep in mind as I mentioned earlier that in my opinion the media won the elections, not the candidates.
Sorry, ironsides, media does not win the elections, candidates do. The media was uniformly against Reagan and both the Bushes. They managed to win despite media’s opposition. In Reagan’s days, there was no internet, no alternate media. Mainstream press mostly endorsed Carter. Still Reagan won by a landslide.
So don’t make excuses for your candidate, McCain. He lost fair and square. In my opinion, he sealed his fate the day he picked Joan of Arc as a running mate.
No, your best bet to get rid of Obama is to join the far right conspiracy nuts, who have filed dozens of lawsuits claiming that Obama is an illegal alien and must be deported forthwith. Your only hope is that their lawsuits succeed, Obama is booted out of USA and McCain is put in his place as the President (with Joan of Arc of course being the real power behind the throne).
Sorry, ironsides, media does not win the elections, candidates do. The media was uniformly against Reagan and both the Bushes. They managed to win despite media’s opposition. In Reagan’s days, there was no internet, no alternate media. Mainstream press mostly endorsed Carter. Still Reagan won by a landslide.
So don’t make excuses for your candidate, McCain. He lost fair and square. In my opinion, he sealed his fate the day he picked Joan of Arc as a running mate.
No, your best bet to get rid of Obama is to join the far right conspiracy nuts, who have filed dozens of lawsuits claiming that Obama is an illegal alien and must be deported forthwith. Your only hope is that their lawsuits succeed, Obama is booted out of USA and McCain is put in his place as the President (with Joan of Arc of course being the real power behind the throne).
Right wingers do not consider New York Times reliable. They consider most of the mainstream press to be unreliable and left wing. According to the right-wingers, FOX is the only reliable news source. I am aware of that.
Well, we have a difference of opinion here, and we will never settle that. According to you, most of the mainstream publications such as New York Times, Washington Post, LA Times, CNN, BBC etc. are notoriously unreliable, belong to the far left and are in the pockets of Obama. The only publications you trust is the FOX news or Washington Times.
In my opinion, FOX news, Washington Times etc. are right wing publications, mainstream media are pretty much unbiased, reputable and respectable. Let us leave it at that.