ADVERTISEMENT

MSNBC

MSNBC is the worst of all of them.
By far. They are the mouthpiece of Democrats. People would say that FoxNews is the mouthpiece for Republicans, but i’ve seen Fox criticize Trump on more than a few occasions.

I think msnbc and Democrats literally collude to send out a message they want out there. And then media outlets like the New York Times, the Washington Post, USA Today, et al, follow in lock step. If you follow their stories, they use the very same verbiage on their stories. And you know what they say: if your told the same thing enough, you starting believing it is the truth. (That was the idea of Hitler, Joseph Goebbels, and the Nazis).

Either way, seeing news networks in this role in politics instead of the role of the watchdog of all politicians is a very slippery slope for our country.
 
Last edited:
but i’ve seen Fox criticize Trump on more than a few occasions.
And I've seen some on MSNBC criticize Biden on more than a few occasions, especially lately.

But yes, MSNBC is definitely a left-wing new source just as Fox News is a right-wing news source.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: OUSOONER67
And I've seen some on MSNBC criticize Biden on more than a few occasions, especially lately.

But yes, MSNBC is definitely a left-wing new source just as Fox News is a right-wing news source.
Thus, why I said FoxNews is considered to be the mouthpiece of the republicans. At least you’ll admit that MSNBC is left wing.

To be honest, I do not trust any massive media outlets. They’re all in it to “get clicks.” And in today’s media world, they’re all desperate for followers.
 
Only Dims with mental issues watch MSNBC. 1 out of 3 Dims still think the assassination attempt was staged. Somehow in their polling each one out of those 3 watch MSNBC, because their viewership is not very big.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GunsOfFrankEaton
Of course it is. Who wouldn't admit this?


So you don't trust Fox News?
Trust them? I’ll say this: when they state their opinion (which is what both Fox and MSNBC do) I agree a lot more with FoxNews than other networks.
 
Only Dims with mental issues watch MSNBC.
Would you say the same thing about Republicans who watch Fox News? They have mental issues too?

1 out of 3 Dims still think the assassination attempt was staged.
And how many conspiracy theories do you believe in? You post numerous conspiracy theories on here all the time. You just pushed the conspiracy theory that President Biden has never been in charge as President on another thread.

You are no different from the Democrats you just mentioned. Pot, meet kettle.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: OUSOONER67
Trust them? I’ll say this: when they state their opinion (which is what both Fox and MSNBC do) I agree a lot more with FoxNews than other networks.
FOX has exposed so much the last few years: The Russia dossier, the illegal FISA warrants directed at Trump, Hunters laptop that 51 former intelligence people said was fake, the Charleston lie, Joe’s lack of mental ability (which strangely only conservatives could see?), etc…
 
Trust them? I’ll say this: when they state their opinion (which is what both Fox and MSNBC do) I agree a lot more with FoxNews than other networks.
I'm sure you do, because Fox News is a right-wing source.

But do you not trust Fox News? You stated you don't trust any massive media outlet. Fox News is a massive media outlet. Do you not trust Fox News too?
 
  • Haha
Reactions: OUSOONER67
Would you say the same thing about Republicans who watch Fox News? They have mental issues too?


And how many conspiracy theories do you believe in? You post numerous conspiracy theories on here all the time. You just pushed the conspiracy theory that President Biden has never been in charge as President on another thread.

You are no different from the Democrats you just mentioned. Pot, meet kettle.
We have proof Trump had an assassination attempt on his life. Those people are fruit cakes. Has anyone on FOX called Joe, Hitler? Can you prove Biden has been in charge? Prove it. He dang sure is not now. Matter of fact, he better not be. We would like to know who. FOX, News Nation, and local news at times, is the only place conservatives can go. The rest of the legacy media is all graduates of leftist schools or former Dim political operatives.

20 years ago I was telling people our news no different than Russia, we just get 2 different sets of lies.

Liberal media now is ok with so dividing a country they are speeding us towards a civil war with divisive hate speech.
 
Last edited:
I'm just asking if you trust or don't trust Fox News? That is all.
It is real simple. You take in several “news” reports and judge for yourself. Seldom is anything just news anymore, all editorial, no one just presents the facts.

How any lib is not so pissed off at lib media and convincing libs Joe was ok these last 5 years as he was hidden away from press conferences, the fewest of any Prez and not even close, hidden in a basement last time to run for Prez, and you BELIEVED it? The biggest lie and hoax EVER on the American public? You could not even watch and think with your own 2 eyes? And you want to talk about the media and how intelligent lib viewers are? Or if lib media had an OUNCE of credibility left?
 
We have proof Trump had an assassination attempt on his life.
But there are also many unanswered questions still surrounding the assassination. And in the absence of truthful information, conspiracy theorists step in to fill the gap.

Therefore, there are some who are embracing conspiracy theories regarding this event. Just as you embrace conspiracy theories all the time, even when there is proof that your theory is wrong.

Has anyone on FOX called Joe, Hitler?
I don't know, I don't watch Fox News
all the time. Vance said Trump could be America's Hitler and Vance is now Trump's running mate. Vance isn't a liberal.

So what is your point?

Can you prove Biden has been in charge? Prove it. He dang sure is not now.
Sure. Just as you stated about Trump's assassination attempt, we have proof. We have the exact same type of proof too.

FOX, News Nation, and local news at times, is the only place conservatives can go.
This is incorrect.

Yes, those sources are the only place "conservatives" can go if they don't want to be confronted with anything that makes them uncomfortable. Those sources are the only place "conservatives" can go if they want to hear Republican talking points and not be confronted consistently with the Democratic or liberal viewpoint. They are where "conservatives" can go who don't want to be challenged in their thinking.

For those conservatives who don't mind being challenged and who want to know what the other half of the country is thinking, there are plenty of other news sources they can go to.

Liberal media now is ok with so dividing a country they are speeding us total a civil war with divisive hate speech.
Liberal media doesn't divide this country anymore then does right-wing media. Liberal media isn't speeding us to a civil war any faster than right-wing media.

bte, the political division in our news sources is nothing new. This has been present in our country since the beginning. It is a product of freedom of the press.
 
But there are also many unanswered questions still surrounding the assassination. And in the absence of truthful information, conspiracy theorists step in to fill the gap.

Therefore, there are some who are embracing conspiracy theories regarding this event. Just as you embrace conspiracy theories all the time, even when there is proof that your theory is wrong.


I don't know, I don't watch Fox News
all the time. Vance said Trump could be America's Hitler and Vance is now Trump's running mate. Vance isn't a liberal.

So what is your point?


Sure. Just as you stated about Trump's assassination attempt, we have proof. We have the exact same type of proof too.


This is incorrect.

Yes, those sources are the only place "conservatives" can go if they don't want to be confronted with anything that makes them uncomfortable. Those sources are the only place "conservatives" can go if they want to hear Republican talking points and not be confronted consistently with the Democratic or liberal viewpoint. They are where "conservatives" can go who don't want to be challenged in their thinking.

For those conservatives who don't mind being challenged and who want to know what the other half of the country is thinking, there are plenty of other news sources they can go to.


Liberal media doesn't divide this country anymore then does right-wing media. Liberal media isn't speeding us to a civil war any faster than right-wing media.

bte, the political division in our news sources is nothing new. This has been present in our country since the beginning. It is a product of freedom of the press.
You are an idiot. If conservatives don’t watch FOX, we think Russia dossier real, Hunter laptop does not exist, and China had nothing to do with COVID. You ate all that crap up. I watch lib media and compare.

Back in the day dumbass, all media warned you when they were going to express an editorial view. Prior to that, it was news. Sure they had political leanings, nothing like today. They gave news first, warned you what they were about to feed you was an OPINION.

CNN learned no one wanted to watch the same rolling news report all day long so they screwed us all with disguising editorial as news.

You are taking to someone who is old enough to know that at one time we actually had real news.

You don’t care if the news is pawned off as editorial today and lib faithful followers believe it because you just want power and your opinion on how we should all live to rule the day.

Remember when conservatives were censored on Twitter and libs told conservatives to go get their own social media? Then Elon came along and gave us free speech, and the so called party of free speech lost their marbles.
 
Last edited:
You really think this is a trick question. It is real simple. When they make a really good sourced, fact based presentation, it provides credibility. Risk assessment on how accurate they believe their source is if applicable helps. Usually that type of reporting is confirmed or not later, like Hunter’s laptop. That is when their journalistic reporting is on the line. But most don’t care anymore. Did lib media EVER apologize for being wrong on the laptop? Or the dossier? Did you expect them to? Most of all, did you want them to?

When they provide editorial, you know that is an opinion. Take it or leave it. Seems libs believe Trump is Hitler because the media has said so for so long, that is why JD Vance said he believed that about Trump. He trusted the legacy lib media at one time. Thankfully he can think on his own. Give us proof he is Hitler.

Most of the shows are just that and they weave opinion with interviews and other reporting.

Brett Baier on FOX News reports the news. Seldom does editorial. The rest? Are shows. Buyer be aware.

But Libs love them those emotional shows like Morning Joe, Maddow and The View. Laced with the most divisive vile attacks. Trump is Hitler. Threat to Democracy.

Not about who you trust, it is about evaluating the substance and quality of the news reporting and comparing it to what you are seeing with your own eyes, your common sense, and any additional investigation you do on your own.

Who would blindly trust anyone without taking the time to evaluate the quality of the reporting? Report by report.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: GunsOfFrankEaton
If conservatives don’t watch FOX,
I never said don't watch Fox News. I was speaking of conservatives watching or reading news sources other than just right-wing sources all the time. And why some conservatives refuse to get out of their echo chamber.

all media warned you when they were going to express an editorial view. Prior to that, it was news. Sure they had political leanings, nothing like today. They gave news first, warned you what they were about to feed you was an OPINION.
I don't agree with this. It just isn't completely true. You are creating a past that didn't exist.

News sources have always had a bias or a political outlook. Yes, before we had 24 hour news stations, many of the media sources would let you know when an editorial view was being given but there were still biases, there was still a political outlook behind the news.

With they said, are you claiming you can't recognize the difference between a news report and an editorial opinion today on Fox News or MSNBC? For example, you don't know that the talking heads are giving their opinions?

I do and I believe most people who watch these channels know too. Or at least I hope so

You are taking to someone who is old enough to know that at one time we actually hard real news.
What you are doing is idolizing the past and presenting a past that just didn't exist.

Yes, there are differences today, mainly because of the 24 hour nature of news and because of social media. But news sources have always had a bias and a political outlook in this country.

because you just want power and your opinion on how we should all live to rule the day.
And you don't want power and your opinion on how we should all live to rule the day?

Welcome to America.

lol, come on man.

Remember when conservatives were censored on Twitter and libs told conservatives to go get their own social media? Then Elon came along and gave us free speech, and the so called party of free speech lost their marbles.
lol

X still takes down tweets and removes tweets. They still ban users.

X has every right to censor their social media platform. Before Musk, now under Musk, and when Musk moves on. It has absolutely nothing to do with freedom of speech. X isn't the government.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: OUSOONER67
You really think this is a trick question. It is real simple. When they make a really good sourced, fact based presentation, it provides credibility. Risk assessment on how accurate they believe their source is helps. Usually that type of reporting is confirmed or not later, like Hunter’s laptop. That is when their journalistic reporting is on the line. But most don’t care anymore.

When they provide editorial, you know that is an opinion. Take it or leave it. Seems libs believe Trump is Hitler because the media has said so for so long, that is why JD Vance said he believed that about Trump. He trusted the legacy lib media at one time. Thankfully he can think on his own. Give us proof he is Hitler.

Most of the shows are just that and they weave opinion with interviews and other reporting.

Brett Baier on FOX News reports the news. Seldom does editorial. The rest? Are shows. Buyer be aware.
So you don't always trust Fox News. Got it. Thanks for answering.

btw, all you had to do was say that you didn't trust Fox News instead of writing all of that. I never intended my question to be a trick question. Stop making assumptions.

Seems libs believe Trump is Hitler because the media has said so for so long, that is why JD Vance said he believed that about Trump. He trusted the legacy lib media at one time. Thankfully he can think on his own. Give us proof he is Hitler.
lol and you believe this? You believe a conservative (Vance) was fooled by the "legacy media" because he trusted them? Really?🤣🤣

Also, how can you claim Vance thinks on his own when he allowed the "legacy media" to mislead him?

btw, there are some on the left who agree with Vance. But they would tell you they believe this because of what Trump has done, what he has said, and what he says he wants to do. They would tell you it has nothing to do with the media.

But Libs love them those emotional shows like Morning Joe, Maddow and The View.
And right-wingers love their right-wing shows and propagandists, like many of the shows on Fox News, Tucker, etc.

There is no difference.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: OUSOONER67
I never said don't watch Fox News. I was speaking of conservatives watching or reading news sources other than just right-wing sources all the time. And why some conservatives refuse to get out of their echo chamber.


I don't agree with this. It just isn't completely true. You are creating a past that didn't exist.

News sources have always had a bias or a political outlook. Yes, before we had 24 hour news stations, many of the media sources would let you know when an editorial view was being given but there were still biases, there was still a political outlook behind the news.

With they said, are you claiming you can't recognize the difference between a news report and an editorial opinion today on Fox News or MSNBC? For example, you don't know that the talking heads are giving their opinions?

I do and I believe most people who watch these channels know too. Or at least I hope so


What you are doing is idolizing the past and presenting a past that just didn't exist.

Yes, there are differences today, mainly because of the 24 hour nature of news and because of social media. But news sources have always had a bias and a political outlook in this country.


And you don't want power and your opinion on how we should all live to rule the day?

Welcome to America.

lol, come on man.


lol

X still takes down tweets and removes tweets. They still ban users.

X has every right to censor their social media platform. Before Musk, now under Musk, and when Musk moves on. It has absolutely nothing to do with freedom of speech. X isn't the government.
How old are you before preaching about romanticizing about the past? They use to warn the hell out of you before going to editorial. By the time I was 8, I could recite the warning verbatim.

Walter Cronkite was the one that crossed the line when he took a hard line on the Vietnam war and said it was not winnable, he expressed an opinion and passed it off news, as a fact. As great as Walter was, that was the day the line was crossed. Others soon followed.
 
They use to warn the hell out of you before going to editorial. By the time I was 8, I could recite the warning verbatim.
I didn't disagree with this, did I? Nope.

This changed with the 24 hour news stations. But one can still tell the difference between a news report and talking heads giving an opinion on Fox News or MSNBC.

As great as Walter was, that was the day the line was crossed. Others soon followed.
This was not when the line was crossed.

You clearly need to study some history. Go back and study about the news when Jefferson and Adams were going at it, or during the Andrew Jackson years, or leading up to the Civil War, or during Reconstruction, or at the turn of the 20th century, or even the lap dog journalists of the 20th century.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: OUSOONER67
I didn't disagree with this, did I? Nope.

This changed with the 24 hour news stations. But one can still tell the difference between a news report and talking heads giving an opinion on Fox News or MSNBC.


This was not when the line was crossed.

You clearly need to study some history. Go back and study about the news when Jefferson and Adams were going at it, or during the Andrew Jackson years, or leading up to the Civil War, or during Reconstruction, or at the turn of the 20th century, or even the lap dog journalists of the 20th century.
How old are you? We are talking modern news. I am talking about what I LIVED and experienced. I answered your questions.

Did you demand your lib legacy media to apologize to you for lying to you about the Russian dossier, the laptop, and Joe’s health? Did you not believe the initial reporting on the dossier, the laptop, and Joe’s health? What reporting sources did you trust?

Come on now @my_2cents
answer a few questions. I say you dodge. Like the good little lefty you are.
 
Did you demand your lib legacy media to apologize to you for lying to you about the Russian dossier, the laptop, and Joe’s health?
I don't recall being lied to about the Russian dossier. I recall reports about the dossier that clearly stated the questions about the dossier and then talking heads giving their opinions on it all.

You know, the difference between news reports and editorial opinion that we have discussed. I could recognize the difference, could you not?

Same goes for the laptop and the President's health. btw, it appears you are not accepting the editorial opinion of right-wing sources regarding the President's health. Are you not?

Did you not believe the initial reporting on the dossier, the laptop, and Joe’s health? What reporting sources did you trust?
Again, there is a difference between the reporting and the talking heads giving their opinions.

I believed the reporting (for the most part, not completely though) and I took the talking heads' opinions for what it was, opinions. I still do.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: OUSOONER67
I don't recall being lied to about the Russian dossier. I recall reports about the dossier that clearly stated the questions about the dossier and then talking heads giving their opinions on it all.

You know, the difference between news reports and editorial opinion that we have discussed. I could recognize the difference, could you not?

Same goes for the laptop and the President's health. btw, it appears you are not accepting the editorial opinion of right-wing sources regarding the President's health. Are you not?


Again, there is a difference between the reporting and the talking heads giving their opinions.

I believed the reporting (for the most part, not completely though) and I took the talking heads' opinions for what it was, opinions. I still do.
How old are you? Simple question, but hey, if you believe in the party that can’t define a women, no surprise you can’t answer.

You were not lied to about the dossier? You ok with Hillary paying for the dossier to be the basis for an impeachment? Don’t recall? You living under a rock? It was a nothing burger to you and all the other libs that dragged this country thru a horrible false investigation. Gee, just some conversation you know. A lot of us remember the lie, but not you. Wow. Only watched FOX News on this topic I guess. No, more likely you just follow the Dim talking points and not strain that small brain.

You did not watch any news reporting, just the editorial? You did not believe it when the lib media told you 51 former intelligence officials said the laptop was Russian interference?

FOX had the guy that worked on the laptop on their station. That is real reporting, and you did not want to know about it.

You never evaluated the reporting?

Never formulated an opinion?

Just what I thought, complete waste of time. Your lack of intellectual honesty is not surprising. Because you lack IQ.

You admitted that you believe politics is about holding power, does not sound much like democracy to me.

Our politicians are suppose to represent us and do the work of the people. Not gain power and rule.
 
Last edited:
How old are you? .
My age has no relevance to this conversation just as your age doesn't either.

You were not lied to about the dossier? Don’t recall? You living under a rock? It was a nothing burger to you and all the other libs that dragged this country thru a horrible false investigation. Gee, just some conversation you know. A lot of us remember the lie, but not you. Wow. Only watched FOX News on this topic I guess. No, more likely you just follow the Dim talking points and not strain that small brain.
Again, I remember news reports on the dossier and in every one that I remember, the questions about the dossier were reported on. On CNN and MSNBC. Also in newspaper sources and other sources.

Yes, talking heads gave their opinions about it all. But again, I knew that was just opinions. They could be wrong they could be right.

It seems that you confused the two. Probably so since this is how Fox News and other right-wing sources presented it all to you. They showed you a clip of a talking head (editorial opinion) and you assumed this was all that was occurring in other news sources. But it wasn't.

Also, if you recall, I hardly ever talked about the dossier on this board because of all the questions revolving around it.

And no, I wasn't just watching Fox News.

You did not watch any news reporting, just the editorial? You did not believe it when the lib media told you 51 former intelligence officials said the laptop was Russian interference?
I watched both, news reporting and editorial. But I could recognize the difference. Could you not?

btw, Russian interference is something completely different from the dossier. It has been proven that Russia interfered in the 2016 election.

You never evaluated the reporting?

Never formulated an opinion?
Of course I did. But again, there is a difference between news reports and editorial opinion. You can't claim editorial opinion on say MSNBC is the same thing as news reporting from NBC News. Same goes with CNN and Fox News.

Yes, one tactic that Fox News (and other right-wing sources) uses is to conflate the two and claim that editorial opinion is all the other sources are doing. But that isn't true.

Just what I thought, complete waste of time. Your lack of intellectual honesty is not surprising. Because you lack IQ.
I am being completely honest with you. What I'm telling you is just challenging what you thought to be true. What you have been told is true.

Instead of attacking me, maybe you should start considering whether you are getting the complete truth from your right-wing sources. Get out of the echo chamber for a little bit and listen to the experiences/thoughts of those who are not right-wingers.

You admitted that you believe politics is about holding power, does not sound much like democracy to me.

Our politicians are suppose to represent us and do the work of the people. Not gain power and rule.
Politics is about obtaining and holding onto political power. It is about exercising political power to accomplish political goals. This is true for Republicans and Democrats.

Don't you want Trump Republicans to have political power over the next two years? Of course you do. Come on man lol.

And yes, our politicians are supposed to represent us and do the work of the people. In order to do that though, they must gain political power and rule. Trump can't do what you want him to do if he doesn't hold political power or office, now can he?

Right-wingers desire political power and influence just as much as those on the left do. This is how our political system works.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: OUSOONER67
Here is what I have learned:

2 pesos does not know how old he is. Or is too embarrassed to admit his age.

He is perfectly fine with the legacy lib lies, not even the slightest bit upset. And we are not talking about little lies. We are talking about lies to get a sitting US President out of office over a false dossier; all the lib media pushed it, and this one little network, by the name of FOX, just one, did the work to report it was false. Not even that hard frankly. Bigger story than watergate. Illegal FISA spying on a US citizen involved. No biggie.

He is also perfectly fine with, the lib legacy media, protecting and lying to the public about Biden’s health to keep a sitting US President in office. Giving Joe cards to tell him what reporters to call on, while knowing the question and the answers on the card, and was never a clue the media was in on it.

Or Joe hardly ever having a press conference and dealing with the current WH press secretary to lie all day long for Joe. That is how much Joe respects an AA lesbian, he puts her in front of the camera to lie everyday for him. Anyone ever take her seriously professionally once Trump gets in office? Oh, probably MSNBC.

Cheap fakes!

2 pesos loves him some lying lib legacy media, all to stay in power.
 
Last edited:
Here is what I have learned:

2 pesos does not know how old he is. Or is too embarrassed to admit his age.

He is perfectly fine with the legacy lib lies, not even the slightest bit upset. And we are not talking about little lies. We are talking about lies to get a sitting US President out of office over a false dossier; all the lib media pushed it, and this one little network, by the name of FOX, just one, did the work to report it was false. Not even that hard frankly. Bigger story than watergate. Illegal FISA spying on a US citizen involved. No biggie.

He is also perfectly fine with, the lib legacy media, protecting and lying to the public about Biden’s health to keep a sitting a President in office. Giving Joe cards to tell him what reporters to call on, while knowing the question and the answers on the card was never a clue the media was in on it.

Or Joe hardly ever having a press conference and dealing with the current WH press secretary to lie all day long for Joe. That is how much Joe respects an AA lesbian, he puts her in front of the camera to lie everyday for him.

Cheap fakes!

2 pesos loves him some lying legacy media, all to stay in power.
I never said I was fine or ok with lies. I'm just telling you that I can recognize the difference between news reporting and editorial opinion.

You originally claimed these two different types of sources exist. Yet now, you are acting like they don't exist and everything is one in the same. Make up your mind. Which one is it?

This last post from you is also filled with right-wing propaganda from talking heads that you apparently have accepted without question. You are doing what you claim I and other liberals are doing. You are projecting.

You are also refusing to listen to anyone who doesn't reinforce your political viewpoints.

Is there any surprise then that you only watch and listen to right-wing media sources? Nope. You enjoy the echo chamber and you have no desire to have any of your political viewpoints challenged.
 
I never said I was fine or ok with lies. I'm just telling you that I can recognize the difference between news reporting and editorial opinion.

You originally claimed these two different types of sources exist. Yet now, you are acting like they don't exist and everything is one in the same. Make up your mind. Which one is it?

This last post from you is also filled with right-wing propaganda from talking heads that you apparently have accepted without question. You are doing what you claim I and other liberals are doing. You are projecting.

You are also refusing to listen to anyone who doesn't reinforce your political viewpoints.

Is there any surprise then that you only watch and listen to right-wing media sources? Nope. You enjoy the echo chamber and you have no desire to have any of your political viewpoints challenged.
How do you think I know about the lies? I watch the lib media from time to time. So, you trust lib media, and you would never, ever, hold them accountable to a retraction? Never seen you mention it on this board. Never seen you say anything about upset with being lied to. Not projecting anything, I am trying to get you to answer honestly the same way you asked @SUPERPOKES, which we have.

Both methods I have discussed how I evaluate, I told you I believed in the reporting at FOX due to the quality of reporting on certain issues. You will not address the quality of the reporting on certain issues relative to the legacy leftist media.

I have tuned out most media from daily viewing for awhile, until the debate, just like now, and 4 and 8 years ago.

Your gig is up. No one gives AF about your lib terms like echo chamber, I don’t like my viewpoints challenged? Seriously? How about 2 impeachments, constant lib lies, lawfare, and an assassination attempt. How about being called every name in the book by libs? Conservatives are being persecuted constantly. Must be nice to sit in the comfort of the legacy lib media and never have your views challenged and tell others to stop enjoying their comfort which mostly does not exist. We don’t give AF anymore, libs tried to silence all of us by assassination.

Must be nice to have an opinion without the discomfort of thought.

You will not admit your age, which means you don’t know how the legacy media use to report the news and editorial, because you did not live it.
 
Last edited:
2 pesos watching Maddow:

8g0c2o.jpg


40hv.gif
 
Gee, Washington Post agreed with me back in 2018...

"But something did pivot when Cronkite crossed the line into opinion. Cronkite mainstreamed antiwar sentiment. The U.S. intervention ceased to be framed by TV news reporters as “our” fight against the Viet Cong. The news media distanced itself from the government’s agenda, and that paved the way, a few years later, for the publication of the Pentagon Papers.
A Cronkite Moment is no longer possible, because the news ecosystem today is too fragmented. The role of the news anchor has been diminished. Many Americans would be hard-pressed to name the current anchor of “The CBS Evening News.”
Cronkite’s great persuasive power emerged from his long history of not attempting to be persuasive at all. That allowed him to fly to Vietnam like an intercontinental ballistic missile of objectivity. But the past half-century has seen a steady erosion in the trust Americans place in institutions such as the news media. Partisan journalists, wielding verbal flamethrowers, view their “objective” counterparts as retailers of false balance. The media culture no longer requires or wants someone with the authority to say, as Cronkite did every night at the close of his broadcast, “And that’s the way it is . . .” "
.
 
How do you think I know about the lies? I watch the lib media from time to time. So, you trust lib media, and you would never, ever, hold them accountable to a retraction? Never seen you mention it on this board. Never seen you say anything about upset with being lied to. Not projecting anything, I am trying to get you to answer honestly the same way you asked @SUPERPOKES, which we have.

Both methods I have discussed how I evaluate, I told you I believed in the reporting at FOX due to the quality of reporting on certain issues. You will not address the quality of the reporting on certain issues relative to the legacy leftist media.

I have tuned out most media from daily viewing for awhile, until the debate, just like now, and 4 and 8 years ago.

Your gig is up. No one gives AF about your lib terms like echo chamber, I don’t like my viewpoints challenged? Seriously? How about 2 impeachments, constant lib lies, lawfare, and an assassination attempt. How about being called every name in the book by libs? Conservatives are being persecuted constantly. Must be nice to sit in the comfort of the legacy lib media and never have your views challenged and tell others to stop enjoying their comfort which mostly does not exist. We don’t give AF anymore, libs tried to silence all of us by assassination.

Must be nice to have an opinion without the discomfort of thought.

You will not admit your age, which means you don’t know how the legacy media use to report the news and editorial, because you did not live it.
That idiot is on ignore, for a reason. You stated most of them. I have tried to engage him from time to time, but he does the exact same thing every time. He's a bot, even if he is human. You are talking to a devout follower, who refuses to think or accept that you can. He will continue to do so until everyone puts him on ignore, and goes back to having conversations, instead of whatever it is he thinks he is doing. It's not political talk, it's simply trolling, and he doesn't do it well. My advice, put him on ignore, he is what the ignore feature was made for. He has never changed, and he will never will. I know we accept all free speech here, but he is not representative of free speech, he represents the opposite of it, as all he is trying to do is stifle your speech.
 
That idiot is on ignore, for a reason. You stated most of them. I have tried to engage him from time to time, but he does the exact same thing every time. He's a bot, even if he is human. You are talking to a devout follower, who refuses to think or accept that you can. He will continue to do so until everyone puts him on ignore, and goes back to having conversations, instead of whatever it is he thinks he is doing. It's not political talk, it's simply trolling, and he doesn't do it well. My advice, put him on ignore, he is what the ignore feature was made for. He has never changed, and he will never will. I know we accept all free speech here, but he is not representative of free speech, he represents the opposite of it, as all he is trying to do is stifle your speech.

As I mentioned elsewhere, he’s a treasure trove of false equivalencies, circular arguments, and gotcha games. He never engages in a conversation in good faith unless you are in agreement with him. Waste of electrons
 
That idiot is on ignore, for a reason. You stated most of them. I have tried to engage him from time to time, but he does the exact same thing every time. He's a bot, even if he is human. You are talking to a devout follower, who refuses to think or accept that you can. He will continue to do so until everyone puts him on ignore, and goes back to having conversations, instead of whatever it is he thinks he is doing. It's not political talk, it's simply trolling, and he doesn't do it well. My advice, put him on ignore, he is what the ignore feature was made for. He has never changed, and he will never will. I know we accept all free speech here, but he is not representative of free speech, he represents the opposite of it, as all he is trying to do is stifle your speech.
Not a bot, but his lengthier posts do appear to be AI generated.
 
That idiot is on ignore, for a reason. You stated most of them. I have tried to engage him from time to time, but he does the exact same thing every time. He's a bot, even if he is human. You are talking to a devout follower, who refuses to think or accept that you can. He will continue to do so until everyone puts him on ignore, and goes back to having conversations, instead of whatever it is he thinks he is doing. It's not political talk, it's simply trolling, and he doesn't do it well. My advice, put him on ignore, he is what the ignore feature was made for. He has never changed, and he will never will. I know we accept all free speech here, but he is not representative of free speech, he represents the opposite of it, as all he is trying to do is stifle your speech.ility to drive his "witnesses"

It is readily apparent that @my2_cents is, indeed, a trial lawyer. He has an uncanny ability to drive those "on the hostile witness stand" to fury. He doesn't lose his cool, rarely calls people names (other than to accuse them of being right-wingers, which, if you are a right-winger you should hardly consider it to be an insult), he stays on point and always brings the conversation back to the point when his opponent drifts off topic. I find it somewhat hypocritical of those who are infuriated because he won't change his mind against their supposed superior logic, while simultaneously knowing there is nothing he can say that will make them change their own mind.
 
It is readily apparent that @my2_cents is, indeed, a trial lawyer. He has an uncanny ability to drive those "on the hostile witness stand" to fury. He doesn't lose his cool, rarely calls people names (other than to accuse them of being right-wingers, which, if you are a right-winger you should hardly consider it to be an insult), he stays on point and always brings the conversation back to the point when his opponent drifts off topic. I find it somewhat hypocritical of those who are infuriated because he won't change his mind against their supposed superior logic, while simultaneously knowing there is nothing he can say that will make them change their own mind.
😂😂😂😂😂😂😂Dumbass. He’s using an AI enhancement. “Heck fire”. Who TF says that? Maybe the Flanders family in the Simpsons, but no one else.
 
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT