Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 809 of 957 FirstFirst ... 309709759799807808809810811819859909 ... LastLast
Results 12,121 to 12,135 of 14342
  1. #12121
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    40,495
    Your edit about NPR is ironic, given that this article was published, not by an outside source, but by RCP's own page, RealClearPolitics:

    It all seemed so simple. I thought the Trump/Russia hoax would finally force my liberal friends to demand a reckoning from their trusted news sources. As the Mueller Report made clear, the New York Times, Washington Post, CNN, NPR and so many others had egregiously and unequivocally misled them for years about the biggest political story since Watergate.
    You and RCP don't seem to agree much on what a bad source is.


    "The thing we may have to accept is that red states really like this pandemic and want to keep it.Ē" - @LOLGOP

  2. #12122
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    39,062
    Quote Originally Posted by natepro View Post
    Your edit about NPR is ironic, given that this article was published, not by an outside source, but by RCP's own page, RealClearPolitics:


    You and RCP don't seem to agree much on what a bad source is.
    The number of consistent good sources is tiny.

  3. #12123
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Central Iowa
    Posts
    6,781
    Quote Originally Posted by natepro View Post
    Keep saying things that are objectively funny and I will.

    This is from the current front page of RCP:

    At Six-Month Mark, Biden and Democrats in Disarray
    David Bossie, FOX News

    A Second War On Terror Against American Citizens
    Glenn Greenwald, FOX News

    Surprise! 'Green Jobs' Not Such Great Jobs After All
    James Pinkerton, Breitbart

    And these are all articles they've put out from Breitbart in the last month.

    They also post things from Salon, OANN, and Newsmax.


    So I have to ask: how exactly are they good at "weeding out bad sources," when they don't appear to be doing that at all?
    I didn't say they were good at weeding out bad sources. I simply said that if I see a story there from one of the questionable sources, I look for it at another source. If I find it, I read them both, compare and contrast.
    Its not up to me to determine what you want to read. That would be up to you.

  4. #12124
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Central Iowa
    Posts
    6,781
    Quote Originally Posted by natepro View Post
    Your edit about NPR is ironic, given that this article was published, not by an outside source, but by RCP's own page, RealClearPolitics:



    You and RCP don't seem to agree much on what a bad source is.
    This is why I compare and contrast stories from different sources. I don't just blindly pick a story and post it elsewhere like some do. I read the entire piece and determine if it is important enough to forward.
    As Scoots said, the list of reliable sources of news is tiny and getting smaller daily. Everyone seems to throw their spin on every story.

  5. #12125
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    40,495
    Quote Originally Posted by catman View Post
    I didn't say they were good at weeding out bad sources.
    Are you just intentionally contradicting yourself at this point?

    Quote Originally Posted by catman View Post
    They do a good job of weeding out bad sources.

  6. #12126
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Central Iowa
    Posts
    6,781
    I apologize for the contradiction. I do feel that they do a fair job of weeding out bad sources.
    If this is the only thing you have to complain about, perhaps things are going pretty well for you.

  7. #12127
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    40,495
    Quote Originally Posted by catman View Post
    I apologize for the contradiction. I do feel that they do a fair job of weeding out bad sources.
    If this is the only thing you have to complain about, perhaps things are going pretty well for you.
    I've pointed out plenty, you just decide to randomly change your position because being fooled by RCP seems to be more important to you. Good luck with that, I guess.

  8. #12128
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Central Iowa
    Posts
    6,781
    I'm not fooled by RCP. I read all of their articles with an open mind. Many are not worth reading, some are.
    Do you have a more reliable source?

  9. #12129
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    40,495
    Quote Originally Posted by catman View Post
    I'm not fooled by RCP. I read all of their articles with an open mind. Many are not worth reading, some are.
    Do you have a more reliable source?
    Of course you are. You can't even decide if they weed out bad sources or not.

    I subscribe to WashPo and NYT, and read NPR and Yahoo News fairly regularly. I'll watch MSNBC on election night, because Steve Kornacki is life, but unless something is actively going on I don't generally watch the news.

  10. #12130
    Join Date
    May 2020
    Posts
    4,566
    Quote Originally Posted by natepro View Post
    Of course you are. You can't even decide if they weed out bad sources or not.

    I subscribe to WashPo and NYT, and read NPR and Yahoo News fairly regularly. I'll watch MSNBC on election night, because Steve Kornacki is life, but unless something is actively going on I don't generally watch the news.
    So you love heavy left sources. Shocking said no one.
    My Ignore List: bklynny67, nastynice, OhSoSlick, spliff(TONE), zmaster52

  11. #12131
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    40,495
    Quote Originally Posted by brett05 View Post
    So you love heavy left sources. Shocking said no one.
    I like hard news sources. I know the right likes to attack any media outlet that dare criticize them, but journalistic standards matter. Enjoy your Breitbart.

  12. #12132
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Central Iowa
    Posts
    6,781
    Quote Originally Posted by natepro View Post
    Of course you are. You can't even decide if they weed out bad sources or not.

    I subscribe to WashPo and NYT, and read NPR and Yahoo News fairly regularly. I'll watch MSNBC on election night, because Steve Kornacki is life, but unless something is actively going on I don't generally watch the news.
    Both WaPo and NYT have lost lawsuits for running false stories recently. Nicholas Sandman has become a very, very wealthy young man because WaPo continued to run with the story about him insulting and harassing the Native American man. They were at one time very reliable sources of news, but now, their editorial board has turned really hard left and they are incredibly biased.
    Both of these papers left their journalistic standards years ago.

  13. #12133
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    40,495
    Quote Originally Posted by catman View Post
    Both WaPo and NYT have lost lawsuits for running false stories recently. Nicholas Sandman has become a very, very wealthy young man because WaPo continued to run with the story about him insulting and harassing the Native American man. They were at one time very reliable sources of news, but now, their editorial board has turned really hard left and they are incredibly biased.
    Both of these papers left their journalistic standards years ago.
    So we've learned that two people here have no working definition for "hard left."

    The WashPo settled out of court, actually. I don't know what case you're talking about with the Times, do you?

  14. #12134
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Central Iowa
    Posts
    6,781
    Yes. Trump won a suit against them during his administration. Both were settled out of court. Neither paper needed the publicity that losing in a courtroom would have brought them. Nicholas Sandman has become an incredibly wealthy young man (I believe CNN was also a party to the suit -- on the wrong end).
    WaPo and NYT are hard left media. Both are entirely too biased to be trusted to cover an important issue anymore.

  15. #12135
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    43,224
    Quote Originally Posted by catman View Post
    Yes. Trump won a suit against them during his administration. Both were settled out of court. Neither paper needed the publicity that losing in a courtroom would have brought them. Nicholas Sandman has become an incredibly wealthy young man (I believe CNN was also a party to the suit -- on the wrong end).
    WaPo and NYT are hard left media. Both are entirely too biased to be trusted to cover an important issue anymore.
    If they settled out of court they didnít lose a suit. You saying they would have lost is conjecture.

Posting Permissions

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