This topic contains 53 replies, has 6 voices, and was last updated by Ccteam .
March 24, 2019 at 4:37 pm #87218
Which one represents YOUR point of view? Were you to spend an hour of your valuable time, which one would you gravitate toward and accept as a legitimate source of NEWS? And “reporting” news constitutes FACTS, no matter how it’s spun. That’s pretty elemental and the foundation of setting up any Journalism 101 class, anywhere it’s employed. That’s all I’m asking.
I grew up with Walter Croncite too–as well as “perfect” Peter Jennings, and all of the rest. And still, I formed my OWN opinions, regardless of their drivel. Later, I recognized them for what they were–propagandists in a growing movement to undo everything that this nation was founded on. It was subtle back then, but is overt now that those that planted those seeds have taken root. And has “progressed” into the present. Unabashedly. Undermining EVERYTHING that this nation was founded on. Top to bottom, shamelessly targeting our children–just as Hitler did. I know you know of what I speak. It’s been recorded–unless it’s been erased.
First step is realizing that “reporting” is a thing of the past. And it doesn’t require admittance into the Mensa society to understand exactly what is going on here.March 24, 2019 at 9:01 pm #87220
None of them. I watch a variety to hear differing views. Then come to my own conclusions.March 24, 2019 at 10:51 pm #87221
Hannity, since you asked me, is an opinion personality not a journalist. A fact he goes to great lengths to point out. As such, it would be difficult to see an impediment to him making the aforementioned campaign rally appearance.
I try my best to gather information from numerous sources. But in 2019 as compared to say 1979 finding just the facts absent any nuance of opinion in matters political is damn near impossible.
I despair for my beloved nation. We have reached the point of political standstill where nothing but the quest for power and the endless “gotcha” exercise is disguised as governance.March 25, 2019 at 9:24 am #87253
I didn’t ask for a response on Hannity himself, though your opinion is welcome. Mine is that he has prostituted himself as a spokesperson for the Trump administration. If I were the network boss, I would have told him he can be host of his show on my network, or he can participate in a political campaign, but he can’t do both at the same time and I would have fired him.
My question though, was about the networks. What other network, as badly biased as they all are, has ever allowed a current host of one of their shows to participate in a campaign rally? To my knowledge, the answer to my question is none. There are many hosts who have been directly involved in campaigns either before or after they hosted a show, but none that I am aware of who did both at the same time. In my opinion it is a clear violation of journalistic ethics (kind of a contradiction in terms in this day and age I admit, but you have to draw the line somewhere).
The closest I can think of to true journalism today is the Wall Street Journal on the conservative side, and the New York Times on the liberal side. They mostly report news and clearly indicate when they are reporting and editorializing for the most part. I’m sure there are others, those are ones I read. They still show their bias in what they tend to report on, so that is why I like to read both conservative and liberal content. Otherwise I might only get part of the news.March 29, 2019 at 3:29 pm #87761
Your opinions and thoughts are well reasoned, sensible, and most importantly, civil. And this is appreciated, whether or not I agree with them.
That said, whether or not Fox elects to allow Hannity to broadcast his show from a political rally or not, is neither unethical, nor biased. And here’s why: Fox remains the ONLY TV medium that both TRULY reports from both sides of the “aisle,” but most expressly, refuses to parrot the same drivel and outright lies–uniformly, standing shoulder to shoulder, 24/7, among the other networks, in their overt hatred of anything at all to do with President Trump. And there are people, coast to coast that know this, and tune in to Fox for these very reasons–endorsing how Fox elects chooses to be the ONLY one that allows the President’s conservative and Constitutional points of view to be heard. Because we AGREE with his sentiments–regardless of how he chooses to express himself sometimes.
As for the WSJ, I agree that they are one of a handful in the print media that actually reports, rather than spews opinion. The New York Times? Hardly…
Finally, and in light of the more than two full years of the disgraceful display in the form of “investigations” that the socialist party has put this nation through (and come up with a big goose egg), it’s now time for some accountability–from both all of the politicians who have participated in this scheme, but those same media we’re discussing here. And in my opinion, some of them should serve jail time for it. It’s absolutely reprehensible, especially when considering how many lives have been trampled in the process, all for the benefit of political careers and ideological agendas, DESPITE the damage it’s caused this nation, and the resultant division to a UNITED states of America.March 29, 2019 at 5:22 pm #87788
Indeed, the folks chatting here are displaying courtesy and respect to one another, even in disagreement. If it were not so, there is no way in hell that I would post here. But a vigorous, respectful debate is to be encouraged and as the founders left us many, many examples of how best to govern ourselves, perhaps the most important lesson they left for us are their methods of debating the living hell out of an issue, but yet all the while maintaining civility and respect towards one another.
I’m reminded of the lengthy “feud” between Adams (senior) and Jefferson, and while heated and pointed, rather than to hit below the belt to each other, they just quit speaking for a number of years. And these were two men who LITERALLY worked hand in hand in promoting the revolution, writing the Declaration, and then writing the Constitution. Thankfully, in their twilight years they buried the hatchet and had a warm and friendly correspondence with each other until they died.
Curiously, they died within hours of each other on July 4th with Jefferson passing first. Me thinks that their debates and long intellectual talks are still going on in the great beyond.March 30, 2019 at 9:16 am #87832
Respectful but vigorous debate is essential to democracy and I appreciate the respectful way of most posters here including No Pitty and FaninMi. I disagree with your assessment of Fox. I think they are just as biased, if not more so than the other networks. The only difference is they are conservative and the others are mostly liberal leaning. Calling all Democrats socialists is not accurate either. Some of their most left leaning are expressing an alarming willingness to consider socialist policy, but that is not where they all stand. The most ring wing Republicans, in my opinion are showing an alarming willingness to accept strong man Banana Republic like disdain for free press and totalitarian policies. Well reasoned moderates in both parties are becoming scarce and that is not a good thing.March 30, 2019 at 4:43 pm #87884
Agree to disagree? Even from the beginning of what’s constituted the greatest trial of human governances, this remains a fact in the annuals of history. Resulting in the most powerful nation mankind has ever witnessed. Being borne of England or not–preceded by Vikings and Danes and a Germanic language or not. Proof of that lies within the very topic of this thread and its sole point in the first place. There is no more definitive proof than that–no matter how it’s spun.
What sets this government apart (STARKLY) from the rest, is its adhehence to the Gospel of Christ. And the very foundation of the Constitution that it was based on. It’s that simple, no matter how much it’s been twisted, contorted and prostituted–much less the power grab that’s infected the Democratic party that now spans decades. And there’s no greater threat to undo ALL of it, than from within–propped up by opening up the gates to those from without. And that too, history has recorded, without fail, spanning the millennia, with encroachments, in the annuals of mankind.
We need a wall NOW more than ever before–and an examination of the destructive forces within to preserve what this nation was founded on from its beginnings and ensure that this path that has met with so much success continues, for the sake of future generations, just as was the vision or those more than 200 years ago that sacrificed EVERYTHING that is now so very taken for granted.
And as an historian, I’d be very interested in your opinion concerning our founding forefather’s account on the dangers concerning Islam. Even that was recorded, more than 200 years ago, as even then, they considered it the greatest threat to our newfound freedoms.
My family’s history in these lands predates the American revolution. How does yours?March 31, 2019 at 9:39 pm #87976
Haven’t traced my ancestry beyond my great grandfather. He was born in Bath County VA. Before that it seems that there was at least one generation that had no birth records. My last name has Scottish ties, so I like to assume that my heritage is Scottish, but have no more proof of that than Elizabeth Warren did of a Native American heritage.
As to religion, this nation was based on Judeo-Christian principles, but also upon the the principle of freedom of religion. The idea that there wasn’t, isn’t, and never should be a state sanctioned religion, and that each citizen is granted freedom ofreligion is should be considered a founding principle of our nation. As far as I know, Islam was such a neglible factor on this continent at that time.March 31, 2019 at 10:16 pm #87977
Ever heard of the Barbary Pirates? They were Islamic and very much an issue of those times.
My ancestors in all 4 main lines of my family (the 2 paternal & the 2 maternal lines) were all here years before The Revolution. The oldest line in the 1670s. My daughters are DAR qualified via my 4 lines & via 2 of their mother’s lines.
The wall is far less about curbing immigration for economic reasons or political reasons, and far more about national security. On the border as it has been in recent years the potential, and actual apprehensions, of terrorist incursions and criminal elements of Mexican and Central American nations has risen exponentially. That is above and beyond the decades old illegal drug trafficking across this border. The border is in crisis and the wall (barrier) WILL work and allow us to better facilitate LEGAL immigration and at the same time give us a tangible deterrent to illegal immigration.April 30, 2019 at 8:33 am #90049
Great debate here.
Ccteam. I get what you say about Hannity. To the people on the Left, especially the Socialists, it seems like he’s a shill for the Republican party. But you can never dispute his facts. He’s reporting the things that the Democrats don’t want you to hear.
If you were FOX you’d tell him to host his own show or participate in a political campaign but not both? If you give the same ultimatum to CNN.CNBC, MSNBC you wouldn’t have a single show that wasn’t a shill for the Democratic party. At least FOX brings in opinions from the other side and allow them to speak their peace.
To your point about the press, WSJ isn’t a Left or Right leaning paper. It’s a business paper that reports the state of business across all boundries. There are some articles that are Left or Right but it’s non bias reporting is why conservatives prefer this paper. But it surely isn’t considered in the same vein as the NY Times or Baltimore Sun or Washington Post or the many CA papers. These papers are just rags that don’t have much to do with real journalism.
With the debate of wall / no wall. There is a way to make our border secure. The Socialist Left wants free boarders so they can capture a good majority of the immigrants. Yes, capture. Bring them in to the country. Feed them with the CHIP card. Give them cell phones. Free medical. Isn’t this the same thing that was done in the 1800’s when hundreds of thousands of immigrants came here and “sold their sole to the company store”? Most of these “entitlements” do exactly that. Putting more and more families on welfare doesn’t help them move into the middle class. The “safety net” becomes a catch all and doesn’t give people the incentive to move up.
Let’s not even start talking about how the Socialist agenda is taking God out of our society. This country was built on religious freedom. Not freedom from religion. First it was taking the Pledge of Allegiance out of schools. In God We Trust off of monuments. It’s not Chirstmas, but Holidays. Now it’s Easter Warshippers. That’s what Obama and Hillary want.May 13, 2019 at 9:10 am #90711
I must admit I no longer listen to Hannity, so I don’t know if when he deals in facts they are indisputable. I quit listening because he rarely dealt in facts. I agree the Wall Street Journal is largely a business paper, but it does wider news and editorials and has high ethical and journalistic standards. I believe, contrary to you, that while the New York Times, or even the Washington Post for that matter, are definitely left leaning, they both uphold high ethical and journalistic standards. You can disagree with their views and still give them credit for always double sourcing material and clearly indicating when they are reporting uncovered facts vs spouting opinion and speculation.
As to Obama’s comment about Easter, I was not offended. I sometimes wonder if there is anything he could say that wouldn’t offend his detractors. It was just a simple Easter greeting, why make it have a negative connotation? We have a current President who bragged that he grabbed women by the pu$$x while he was running for office and many of the same people who look for negative hidden messages supposedly in Obama’s words seemed unoffended by Trump’s vulgar obscenity. And it wasn’t a one time mistake. He is a bully and a misogynist not to mention a pathological liar and he disrespects the balance of power called for in the constitution. No tax break or judge appointment that suits your political leaning should be worth selling out the United States’ constitution.
I work in a rehabilitation hospital. I turned against Trump in his campaign when he made fun of a reporter with a disability because the reporter dared ask a question Trump didn’t like. Trump later denied he was making fun and that the weird way he flailed his arms about when repeating the story was not meant to mock the reporter. But I know what I saw. I saw a bully making fun of someone with a disability. Trump disqualified himself right then and there for me. Do you not agree that his behavior was wildly inappropriate in that case?May 18, 2019 at 12:10 pm #91007
You lost me when you said the NYT and WP hold high ethical and journalistic standards. What they claim and what they do are two different facts.
Bully, misogynist, pathological liar, ……. These are all names you could call Bill Clinton …. oh and rapist.
Did you turn against Biden when he repeatedly told a guy in a wheelchair to stand up and take a bow?May 18, 2019 at 8:52 pm #91025
Haven’t heard the one about Biden, but if he was making fun of someone in a wheelchair I would lose all respect for him.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.