Fireball wrote: ↑Wed Jun 20, 2018 12:53 am
Completely. I break down into tears at least once a day. I can’t sleep anymore. I’ve gained 50 pounds since Trump took office because I’m constantly stress eating. He’s destroying our country. I don’t see how we ever come back from this. I just don’t want to be anymore.
I'm there. I thought America would be a country my kids could be proud of, and Trump is wrecking that.
But we have to keep fighting as long there's a chance to save the country and what it stands for.
GreenGoo wrote: ↑Wed Jun 20, 2018 12:57 am
How and why are the parents giving up their children in these situations?
Can you imagine giving up your kids to, say, Croatian officials when you try to enter the country? Who gives up their kids? And if they aren't giving them up willingly, wtf is happening to separate the kids from their parents?
I am not fear mongering, I genuinely want to know how this is being made to work without bloodshed.
From what I've read, in some cases the guards say they are taking the children for a bath and then they simply never return.
If this is true, this is just... disgusting.
I mean - I guess saying they were 'taking them to the showers' would have been a dead give-away and unoriginal.
Right-wing radio host Rush Limbaugh on Tuesday accused the media of using “fake photos of children crying” in its coverage of migrant children being separated from parents at the border.
“I wonder if when we have a story like this where the media is using fake photos of children crying,” Limbaugh said on his radio show, further adding that “it’s not fake that they’re crying. It’s [that] the children may not even be who they’re being said to be and the children may not be separated.”
“They may not be at the border,” Limbaugh continued. “But I wonder how much of this that the media’s doing is to play off and to corral people who are already wimps and linguini-spined when it comes to kids.”
These people are pathetic.
When darkness veils the world, four Warriors of Light shall come.
I wanna see a Venn Diagram that outlines Trump supporters thoughts on Racial Equality, Immigration, Gay Rights, Women's Rights, Religion in Government... Would those 30-35% that are diehard be massively overlapped in all areas? I feel like they must be.
I's super-hard not to continue to think of them as "Deplorable" when every action they support IS deplorable. I'm at a point of not caring, and not being worried about the divide anymore as long as we can rally enough voter support to squash this new version of the Republican party. The biggest problem seems to be that Democrats refuse to work together as they scrabble like seagulls going after a basket of spilled fries. They see the opportunity, but fight over who'll get more, and as a result, they all lose. Goddammit.
Black Lives Matter
2021-01-20: The first good night's sleep I had in 4 years.
Paingod wrote: ↑Wed Jun 20, 2018 9:20 am
I's super-hard not to continue to think of them as "Deplorable" when every action they support IS deplorable. I'm at a point of not caring, and not being worried about the divide anymore as long as we can rally enough voter support to squash this new version of the Republican party.
Hillary Clinton was right. She told us exactly what he and a fair portion of his supporters were.
The biggest problem seems to be that Democrats refuse to work together as they scrabble like seagulls going after a basket of spilled fries. They see the opportunity, but fight over who'll get more, and as a result, they all lose. Goddammit.
Where do you see this? Almost every Democrat in the House and every Democrat in the Senate are on the same bill to stop the family separations at the border. Everyone is trying to get their 10 minutes of attention, but all are rowing in the same direction.
Wed Oct 20, 2004 1:17 am
Zarathud: The sad thing is that Barak Obama is a very intelligent and articulate person, even when you disagree with his views it's clear that he's very thoughtful. I would have loved to see Obama in a real debate.
Me: Wait 12 years, when he runs for president. :-)
I'm not terribly surprised by the claim that the pictures are fake, as that claim has become the conservative go-to anytime they see something they are uncomfortable with. It will continue to be met with the massive it richly deserves.
I'm a little surprised at the assertion (one that I'm seeing from a number of my conservative acquaintances, and even here) that anyone who cares about the welfare of children who are being forcibly removed from their parents and thrown into cages is weak and "linguini wristed". As if showing empathy towards children placed in horrific situations has somehow become a sign of significant weakness, and only strong, stalwart conservatives can rise above such things.
I'd like to think that level of callousness and utter disregard for another human would backfire tremendously with the general population. Then I remember how continually horrified and disappointed I've become at the depths people will go to in order to justify their tribe.
Last edited by Skinypupy on Wed Jun 20, 2018 9:29 am, edited 1 time in total.
When darkness veils the world, four Warriors of Light shall come.
Paingod wrote: ↑Wed Jun 20, 2018 9:20 amThe biggest problem seems to be that Democrats refuse to work together as they scrabble like seagulls going after a basket of spilled fries. They see the opportunity, but fight over who'll get more, and as a result, they all lose. Goddammit.
Where do you see this? Almost every Democrat in the House and every Democrat in the Senate are on the same bill to stop the family separations at the border. Everyone is trying to get their 10 minutes of attention, but all are rowing in the same direction.
Maybe I'm taking it out of context, but in some local elections I've heard stories about Democrats all pushing for the same ticket instead of letting a couple take majority votes - as a result, they don't get enough backing from anyone to actually overthrow the one or two Republican choices.
Honestly, I feel like I don't hear ANYTHING from Democrats in the news. I feel like I'd have to go hunting for it to find it. Everything I keep seeing is very much the blowhard and his cronies and their easily disproved lies. I haven't been feeling like the Dem party has been effective in much of anything. Maybe I'm just massively frustrated and don't have patience for it anymore.
Black Lives Matter
2021-01-20: The first good night's sleep I had in 4 years.
Paingod wrote: ↑Wed Jun 20, 2018 9:20 amThe biggest problem seems to be that Democrats refuse to work together as they scrabble like seagulls going after a basket of spilled fries. They see the opportunity, but fight over who'll get more, and as a result, they all lose. Goddammit.
Where do you see this? Almost every Democrat in the House and every Democrat in the Senate are on the same bill to stop the family separations at the border. Everyone is trying to get their 10 minutes of attention, but all are rowing in the same direction.
Maybe I'm taking it out of context, but in some local elections I've heard stories about Democrats all pushing for the same ticket instead of letting a couple take majority votes - as a result, they don't get enough backing from anyone to actually overthrow the one or two Republican choices.
Where do you live, again? Local elections often have weird dynamics, and pushing tickets can either be counterintuitively helpful or counterintuitively unhelpful.
Honestly, I feel like I don't hear ANYTHING from Democrats in the news. I feel like I'd have to go hunting for it to find it. Everything I keep seeing is very much the blowhard and his cronies and their easily disproved lies. I haven't been feeling like the Dem party has been effective in much of anything. Maybe I'm just massively frustrated and don't have patience for it anymore.
The issue of Republicans getting more time on TV news has been going on for more than a decade. Too many TV journalists bend over backwards to prove they're not "liberal media" by booking more Republicans than Democrats. DailyKos has catalogued the overbooking of Republicans on the Sunday morning talk shows for years — even 2009-10 when Democrats controlled everything, Republicans were more represented on Sunday morning shows than Democrats. It's not that Democrats don't make themselves available.
Wed Oct 20, 2004 1:17 am
Zarathud: The sad thing is that Barak Obama is a very intelligent and articulate person, even when you disagree with his views it's clear that he's very thoughtful. I would have loved to see Obama in a real debate.
Me: Wait 12 years, when he runs for president. :-)
Paingod wrote: ↑Wed Jun 20, 2018 9:20 amThe biggest problem seems to be that Democrats refuse to work together as they scrabble like seagulls going after a basket of spilled fries. They see the opportunity, but fight over who'll get more, and as a result, they all lose. Goddammit.
Where do you see this? Almost every Democrat in the House and every Democrat in the Senate are on the same bill to stop the family separations at the border. Everyone is trying to get their 10 minutes of attention, but all are rowing in the same direction.
Maybe I'm taking it out of context, but in some local elections I've heard stories about Democrats all pushing for the same ticket instead of letting a couple take majority votes - as a result, they don't get enough backing from anyone to actually overthrow the one or two Republican choices.
Honestly, I feel like I don't hear ANYTHING from Democrats in the news. I feel like I'd have to go hunting for it to find it. Everything I keep seeing is very much the blowhard and his cronies and their easily disproved lies. I haven't been feeling like the Dem party has been effective in much of anything. Maybe I'm just massively frustrated and don't have patience for it anymore.
I agree with some of what you are saying but the Democrats are running a strategy. Is it a good strategy? I guess we'll find out in 5 months but they are running a playbook at a national level that was effective against Berlusconi in Italy. At least there is a road map but not all things are equal hence the we'll see bit.
As to why they seem silent, the media is pretty much geared to report on things that are happening. Since the Dems can't drive investigations, legislative initiatives, or anything really all the Dems can do is react. And those reactions are incorporated in most stories well below the fold as reaction lines. Sometimes they'll show up on a news program and say their piece but they can't drive discussion in any meaningful way. It makes the mid-terms all the more important for this reason.
So with all this Trump is able to drive the outrage machine to his liking. That was part of how he was elected and partly how he controls the narrative now even when it gets out of control. He throws out a tweet and the media amplifies it as headlines no matter the content. It is a terrible, terrible mechanic and another factor in our decline. I can't really blame the Dems for that other than pointing out that they haven't figured out how to manipulate it like the R's do when they are in the minority.
Fireball wrote: ↑Wed Jun 20, 2018 9:38 am
The issue of Republicans getting more time on TV news has been going on for more than a decade. Too many TV journalists bend over backwards to prove they're not "liberal media" by booking more Republicans than Democrats. DailyKos has catalogued the overbooking of Republicans on the Sunday morning talk shows for years — even 2009-10 when Democrats controlled everything, Republicans were more represented on Sunday morning shows than Democrats. It's not that Democrats don't make themselves available.
Plus there's the amplification effect of media, social and otherwise.
You hear the horrible things Republicans say because liberals retweet them, news covers them, late-night hosts mock them, etc.
No one bothers doing much of that when decent elected officials say decent things.
Fireball wrote: ↑Wed Jun 20, 2018 9:38 am
The issue of Republicans getting more time on TV news has been going on for more than a decade. Too many TV journalists bend over backwards to prove they're not "liberal media" by booking more Republicans than Democrats. DailyKos has catalogued the overbooking of Republicans on the Sunday morning talk shows for years — even 2009-10 when Democrats controlled everything, Republicans were more represented on Sunday morning shows than Democrats. It's not that Democrats don't make themselves available.
Plus there's the amplification effect of media, social and otherwise.
You hear the horrible things Republicans say because liberals retweet them, news covers them, late-night hosts mock them, etc.
No one bothers doing much of that when decent elected officials say decent things.
This happened throughout the 2016 election. TV networks would carry every word of Trump's rallies live on TV — even just broadcasting his podium for like an hour before the rally began. So everything Trump had to say — both the horrible things, but also his inane "policy" pronouncements — got massive airtime.
Meanwhile, Hillary Clinton would give really substantial speeches about policy — including policies aimed at helping the very people many accuse her campaign of ignoring — but no one aired them. At best, they'd take the one or two zingers she had against Trump and air those later in the day.
The end result was that a lot of voters felt like Trump was the only candidate talking about the issues that they cared about, and even that Hillary was running a "more negative" campaign than Trump. If networks had held themselves to a reasonable policy of showing either all of both candidates' public speeches every time, or the same number of minutes of the speeches every day, I think the election would have shaped up differently.
Wed Oct 20, 2004 1:17 am
Zarathud: The sad thing is that Barak Obama is a very intelligent and articulate person, even when you disagree with his views it's clear that he's very thoughtful. I would have loved to see Obama in a real debate.
Me: Wait 12 years, when he runs for president. :-)
Fireball wrote: ↑Wed Jun 20, 2018 9:38 am
The issue of Republicans getting more time on TV news has been going on for more than a decade. Too many TV journalists bend over backwards to prove they're not "liberal media" by booking more Republicans than Democrats. DailyKos has catalogued the overbooking of Republicans on the Sunday morning talk shows for years — even 2009-10 when Democrats controlled everything, Republicans were more represented on Sunday morning shows than Democrats. It's not that Democrats don't make themselves available.
Plus there's the amplification effect of media, social and otherwise.
You hear the horrible things Republicans say because liberals retweet them, news covers them, late-night hosts mock them, etc.
No one bothers doing much of that when decent elected officials say decent things.
This happened throughout the 2016 election. TV networks would carry every word of Trump's rallies live on TV — even just broadcasting his podium for like an hour before the rally began. So everything Trump had to say — both the horrible things, but also his inane "policy" pronouncements — got massive airtime.
Meanwhile, Hillary Clinton would give really substantial speeches about policy — including policies aimed at helping the very people many accuse her campaign of ignoring — but no one aired them. At best, they'd take the one or two zingers she had against Trump and air those later in the day.
The end result was that a lot of voters felt like Trump was the only candidate talking about the issues that they cared about, and even that Hillary was running a "more negative" campaign than Trump. If networks had held themselves to a reasonable policy of showing either all of both candidates' public speeches every time, or the same number of minutes of the speeches every day, I think the election would have shaped up differently.
Substantial policy doesn't drive eyeballs and ad revenue like unhinged batshit crazy does.
Hence why we all find ourselves in our current predicament.
When darkness veils the world, four Warriors of Light shall come.
Paingod wrote: ↑Wed Jun 20, 2018 9:20 am
I's super-hard not to continue to think of them as "Deplorable" when every action they support IS deplorable. I'm at a point of not caring, and not being worried about the divide anymore as long as we can rally enough voter support to squash this new version of the Republican party.
Hillary Clinton was right. She told us exactly what he and a fair portion of his supporters were.
So did Trump.
He hasn't done a single terrible thing he didn't promise he would do. He said it all, over and over, and they ate it up.
No one who watched the GOP convention can be surprised by any of this.
Fireball wrote: ↑Wed Jun 20, 2018 9:38 am
The issue of Republicans getting more time on TV news has been going on for more than a decade. Too many TV journalists bend over backwards to prove they're not "liberal media" by booking more Republicans than Democrats. DailyKos has catalogued the overbooking of Republicans on the Sunday morning talk shows for years — even 2009-10 when Democrats controlled everything, Republicans were more represented on Sunday morning shows than Democrats. It's not that Democrats don't make themselves available.
Plus there's the amplification effect of media, social and otherwise.
You hear the horrible things Republicans say because liberals retweet them, news covers them, late-night hosts mock them, etc.
No one bothers doing much of that when decent elected officials say decent things.
This happened throughout the 2016 election. TV networks would carry every word of Trump's rallies live on TV — even just broadcasting his podium for like an hour before the rally began. So everything Trump had to say — both the horrible things, but also his inane "policy" pronouncements — got massive airtime.
Meanwhile, Hillary Clinton would give really substantial speeches about policy — including policies aimed at helping the very people many accuse her campaign of ignoring — but no one aired them. At best, they'd take the one or two zingers she had against Trump and air those later in the day.
The end result was that a lot of voters felt like Trump was the only candidate talking about the issues that they cared about, and even that Hillary was running a "more negative" campaign than Trump. If networks had held themselves to a reasonable policy of showing either all of both candidates' public speeches every time, or the same number of minutes of the speeches every day, I think the election would have shaped up differently.
Substantial policy doesn't drive eyeballs and ad revenue like unhinged batshit crazy does.
Hence why we all find ourselves in our current predicament.
For-profit media failed us. What a shock.
Wed Oct 20, 2004 1:17 am
Zarathud: The sad thing is that Barak Obama is a very intelligent and articulate person, even when you disagree with his views it's clear that he's very thoughtful. I would have loved to see Obama in a real debate.
Me: Wait 12 years, when he runs for president. :-)
Lots of people have the sense that Dems aren't stepping up or even (because they're not being amplified) saying anything.
The fact is that the minority party is doing everything it can legislatively, but Congressional leadership can simply prevent any of it from coming up.
All week long, Dems in congress have been using their time in many, many routine congressional proceedings to speak out against this policy until GOP committee heads call them to order and shut them down. But have you even heard that this is happening? Does it make it into headlines?
Skinypupy wrote: As if showing empathy towards children placed in horrific situations has somehow become a sign of significant weakness, and only strong, stalwart conservatives can rise above such things.
Modern conservatives not only show no empathy, they take *pride* in it. We're living in a world where compassion has become a dirty word, and worthy of mockery.
It's sickening, and it pisses me off that my so-called "Christian" family members follow this worldview, in total opposition of the teachings they supposedly follow.
It also doesn't surprise me that the party of "I'm a fucking man, I'm not a sissy crybaby" are also the party of guns and homophobia.
Fireball wrote: ↑Wed Jun 20, 2018 10:12 am
For-profit media failed us. What a shock.
NPR wasn't much better.
Actually, I'll go even farther. For profit media gives us The New Yorker, the Atlantic, 538, and Rachel Maddow just off the top of my head.
That's light years better coverage than NPR, though I appreciate them as well as they are my go to source in the morning.
Black Lives Matter
"To wield Grond, the mighty hammer of the Federal Government, is to be intoxicated with power beyond what you and I can reckon (though I figure we can ball park it pretty good with computers and maths). Need to tunnel through a mountain? Grond. Kill a mighty ogre? Grond. Hangnail? Grond. Spider? Grond (actually, that's a legit use, moreso than the rest)." - Peacedog
Fireball wrote: ↑Wed Jun 20, 2018 10:12 am
For-profit media failed us. What a shock.
NPR wasn't much better.
Actually, I'll go even farther. For profit media gives us The New Yorker, the Atlantic, 538, and Rachel Maddow just off the top of my head.
That's light years better coverage than NPR, though I appreciate them as well as they are my go to source in the morning.
Every local NPR station is different, but the national NPR news broadcasts seemed to me to be the most substantive and balanced coverage in 2016.
Wed Oct 20, 2004 1:17 am
Zarathud: The sad thing is that Barak Obama is a very intelligent and articulate person, even when you disagree with his views it's clear that he's very thoughtful. I would have loved to see Obama in a real debate.
Me: Wait 12 years, when he runs for president. :-)
Fireball wrote: ↑Wed Jun 20, 2018 10:12 am
For-profit media failed us. What a shock.
NPR wasn't much better.
Actually, I'll go even farther. For profit media gives us The New Yorker, the Atlantic, 538, and Rachel Maddow just off the top of my head.
That's light years better coverage than NPR, though I appreciate them as well as they are my go to source in the morning.
MSNBC is just as vapid as the other cable stations. But, yes, my "for-profit media" comment was mostly about the cancer on our society that is cable news.
Wed Oct 20, 2004 1:17 am
Zarathud: The sad thing is that Barak Obama is a very intelligent and articulate person, even when you disagree with his views it's clear that he's very thoughtful. I would have loved to see Obama in a real debate.
Me: Wait 12 years, when he runs for president. :-)
Skinypupy wrote: As if showing empathy towards children placed in horrific situations has somehow become a sign of significant weakness, and only strong, stalwart conservatives can rise above such things.
Modern conservatives not only show no empathy, they take *pride* in it. We're living in a world where compassion has become a dirty word, and worthy of mockery.
It's sickening, and it pisses me off that my so-called "Christian" family members follow this worldview, in total opposition of the teachings they supposedly follow.
It also doesn't surprise me that the party of "I'm a fucking man, I'm not a sissy crybaby" are also the party of guns and homophobia.
Don't forget the seemingly relentless assault on intellectualism/science.
The only thing we're missing is a genuine Witch Hunt or maybe a good solid Crusade to help jump start another Dark Age.
Black Lives Matter
2021-01-20: The first good night's sleep I had in 4 years.
1/2 the comments on a yahoo news article were either lies about Clinton/Obama doing it first, deserving it because of law breaking or cries of fake news.
What's really infuriating is the Trump voters I know who have no clue about the immigration stuff because they don't read or watch the news. If you voted this guy in, you should at least have the common decency to stay informed as to what he's doing to the country.
YellowKing wrote: ↑Wed Jun 20, 2018 11:05 am
What's really infuriating is the Trump voters I know who have no clue about the immigration stuff because they don't read or watch the news. If you voted this guy in, you should at least have the common decency to stay informed as to what he's doing to the country.
They made a totally informed decision based on the rock-solid foundation of their political knowledge. I'm shocked to find that they'd abandon that to continue watching reruns of Duck Dynasty and leave us all floundering with their choices.
Black Lives Matter
2021-01-20: The first good night's sleep I had in 4 years.
Lewandowski refuses to apologize for 'womp womp' comment.
Corey Lewandowski refused to apologize Wednesday after he dismissed the story of a 10-year-old girl with Down syndrome who was reportedly separated from her mother after crossing the border illegally.
While appearing Tuesday on Fox News, former senior Democratic National Committee adviser Zac Petkanas shared an anecdote he had read about "a 10-year-old girl with Down syndrome" who had been "taken from her mother and put in a cage."
"Womp womp," the former Trump campaign manager responded.
Strikes me that everyone working for Trump is a blooming idiot and unfeeling asshole.
--------------------------------------------
I am Dyslexic of Borg, prepare to have your ass laminated.
I guess Ray Butts has ate his last pancake. http://steamcommunity.com/id/daehawk
"Has high IQ. Refuses to apply it"
Im a bilingual. A bilingual illiterate. I can't read in two languages.
GreenGoo wrote: ↑Wed Jun 20, 2018 10:38 am
1/2 the comments on a yahoo news article were either lies about Clinton/Obama doing it first, deserving it because of law breaking or cries of fake news.
You guys are so fucked.
Meh, I'm as pessimistic as anyone about all this, but a few Russian bots spamming the comment threads on Yahoo doesn't even move the needle for me.
Daehawk wrote: ↑Wed Jun 20, 2018 11:18 am
Lewandowski refuses to apologize for 'womp womp' comment.
Corey Lewandowski refused to apologize Wednesday after he dismissed the story of a 10-year-old girl with Down syndrome who was reportedly separated from her mother after crossing the border illegally.
While appearing Tuesday on Fox News, former senior Democratic National Committee adviser Zac Petkanas shared an anecdote he had read about "a 10-year-old girl with Down syndrome" who had been "taken from her mother and put in a cage."
"Womp womp," the former Trump campaign manager responded.
Why would he? He's a politician and commentator who thrive on doubling down in anger. He gains nothing by acknowledging he's behaving like he's something less than human with a response akin to Executive Order 9066 was good because it was US law.
He is an example of someone who cannot be reached. He's not even willfully ignorant. This is the sound of someone for whom all conversation is over.
GreenGoo wrote: ↑Wed Jun 20, 2018 10:38 am
1/2 the comments on a yahoo news article were either lies about Clinton/Obama doing it first, deserving it because of law breaking or cries of fake news.
You guys are so fucked.
Meh, I'm as pessimistic as anyone about all this, but a few Russian bots spamming the comment threads on Yahoo doesn't even move the needle for me.
Problem is, people read those russian bot comments, then go vote.
I guess that's what we get for letting every Tom, Dick and Harry have a say in who runs the country. Not that the "alternative" model towards which we're heading is going to be any better.
Acting ICE director Thomas Homan, without any sense of irony, tells @TuckerCarlson that he objects to people comparing ICE to Nazis because they "are simply enforcing laws enacted by Congress."
Fireball wrote: ↑Wed Jun 20, 2018 10:33 am
MSNBC is just as vapid as the other cable stations.
I don't think that word means what you think it means.
Nah, I think that's about the right way to describe them.
That's your opinion. They dig more into historical context and significance of current events than any other cable news station.
No, Rachel Maddow does, sometimes. And sometimes Chris Hayes. But their news coverage is useless. It's the same EVERYTHING IS BREAKING NEWS! crap you find on CNN. It's not as evil as Fox, but it's definitely just as vapid.
For the love of God, people, please don't get your news from TV. Read a newspaper. Listen to NPR.
Wed Oct 20, 2004 1:17 am
Zarathud: The sad thing is that Barak Obama is a very intelligent and articulate person, even when you disagree with his views it's clear that he's very thoughtful. I would have loved to see Obama in a real debate.
Me: Wait 12 years, when he runs for president. :-)
Fireball wrote: ↑Wed Jun 20, 2018 10:33 am
MSNBC is just as vapid as the other cable stations.
I don't think that word means what you think it means.
Nah, I think that's about the right way to describe them.
That's your opinion. They dig more into historical context and significance of current events than any other cable news station.
That's fair, but the fundamental problem remains - the organization is driven by profit. Profit is derived very heavily from advertisers buying broadcast time. The cost of broadcast time is highly dependent on the number of eyeballs driven to the channel. Eyeballs don't come to the channel to listen to well-reasoned discourse or policy discussion, they come to the channel to watch train wrecks.
Thus, the primary objective is to get more eyeballs looking at the channel. Thus, vapid. I'll also take "greedy". I don't really hold it against the organization personally, as that's the nature of the business, but it means I can't rely on them for a reasonable take on the situation.
Fireball wrote: ↑Wed Jun 20, 2018 11:53 am
No, Rachel Maddow does, sometimes. And sometimes Chris Hayes. But their news coverage is useless. It's the same EVERYTHING IS BREAKING NEWS! crap you find on CNN. It's not as evil as Fox, but it's definitely just as vapid.
For the love of God, people, please don't get your news from TV. Read a newspaper. Listen to NPR.
You say it like they are mutually exclusive. TV is mostly for analysis and opinion, actual "breaking news" headlines are much easier to follow online.
Fireball wrote: ↑Wed Jun 20, 2018 11:53 am
No, Rachel Maddow does, sometimes. And sometimes Chris Hayes. But their news coverage is useless. It's the same EVERYTHING IS BREAKING NEWS! crap you find on CNN. It's not as evil as Fox, but it's definitely just as vapid.
For the love of God, people, please don't get your news from TV. Read a newspaper. Listen to NPR.
You say it like they are mutually exclusive. TV is mostly for analysis and opinion, actual "breaking news" headlines are much easier to follow online.
Aside from one or two segments a week on Maddow or Anderson Cooper, there's no valuable analysis happening on cable news. You'll find better analysis in magazines like the Economist, or the Atlantic... or basically anywhere that involves reading instead of watching.
And "opinion journalism" on TV doesn't serve any useful purpose. It just exists so that viewers can nod their head in agreement or pump their fist in support of whatever shallow point is being made by the pundit.
Wed Oct 20, 2004 1:17 am
Zarathud: The sad thing is that Barak Obama is a very intelligent and articulate person, even when you disagree with his views it's clear that he's very thoughtful. I would have loved to see Obama in a real debate.
Me: Wait 12 years, when he runs for president. :-)
--------------------------------------------
I am Dyslexic of Borg, prepare to have your ass laminated.
I guess Ray Butts has ate his last pancake. http://steamcommunity.com/id/daehawk
"Has high IQ. Refuses to apply it"
Im a bilingual. A bilingual illiterate. I can't read in two languages.