Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
What sources do Republicans consider legitimate?
I always hear news being dismissed because of where it comes from. So I'm curious what news is considered legitimate to Republicans?
I loved this thread...it showed the right stands for nothing and only is able to stand against...stuff. Except Rupert Murdoch.
I always hear news being dismissed because of where it comes from. So I'm curious what news is considered legitimate to Republicans?
You got it bass-ackward CC, republicans have been dealing with liberal news for a hundred years. It's lefties that dismiss news because they don't appreciate fair and balanced.
I loved this thread...it showed the right stands for nothing and only is able to stand against...stuff. Except Rupert Murdoch.
It shows that you're a delusional hack. Nothing more. Each side accepts 'sources' that provide them with their own version of reality. What both sides share is their inability to interrogate any source. Seems that both left and right are incapable of analyzing information - both prefer their own versions of reality.
Makes both sides pretty easy pickings for those of us with independent thought processes.
You, sir, have got it absolutely correct. They can't answer a simple, direct question, because they know they'll be held to it, and they need the ability to refute any future criticism, credible or not on the outset, so they'll obfuscate, redirect and/or outright ignore.20 views and not one comment....C'mon, I hear all the time the news sources you guys dont accept (Huffpo and others) but what do you accept as credible news sources? Is the question that hard?
Attacking the source is just a rightwinger's way avoiding the argument.
And they won't tell you what sources they consider legitimate, because they don't want to give up that escape mechanism.
Just keep in mind, you only have to prove these rightwing nuts wrong, you don't have to get them to admit they've been proven wrong. If you try to do the latter, they will just wear you out with obstinate denial.
The fog of vagueness.The ones that use facts and reason. Amazing how those pesky things annoy the left.
Oh boy, here we go again...the super-secret-top-secret-extra-secret credible sources that this insider's insider has...with candy on top.I always hear news being dismissed because of where it comes from. So I'm curious what news is considered legitimate to Republicans?
I don't consider 'news' outlets to be legitimate sources anymore. They are mainly agenda driven. I'll accept only those that provide context for any quotes they provide... other than that, I'll stick to my sources to confirm or dismiss any 'information' provided by any media.
Of course she's not inclined to answer. Whatever "pisses off leftists/democrats" is what this self-proclaimed Christian, self-proclaimed Catholic, and self-proclaimed independent is invested in.Because they don't exist. You're trying to use a forum tactic that was worn out 10 years ago...And what are your sources, for the 1000th time?
Specifically.
Here's the thing.... maybe, if it didn't drive a few posters here totally crazy that I don't say... I may have told you. But, since not knowing clearly pisses you off, I am inclined to decline to answer.
...oh I know this is wrong because I have special secret knowledge that proves it wrong.
jeezus.
Plus you rarely if ever contribute anything of substance that would demonstrate any existence of any superior secret imaginary sources.
Grow up. You're not fooling anyone.
I wouldn't hold my breath if I were you though.Nice to know you're a snotty little dipshit who asks questions to make fun of the answers, not because he actually wants to know. I always prefer it when you people out yourselves quickly, so I don't have to waste time paying attention to you.
I didn't make fun of anyones answers stop playing the victim. I even thanked the guy for being the first to answer straight up...that's sooo unfair.
I'll wait for your answer to the question unless all you got is personal attacks.
If it's truly factual and honest news you're looking for, what does it's boredom or excitement have to do with it. Is news supposed to be exciting?you don't consider Fox but consider some websites and blogs.... credibility lost.. sorry.. there is more than 2 hours of news reporting on Fox... yes there is commentary and entertainment shows, but way more than 2 hours of news reportingI'll ask again incase you missed it.
What do you think are legitamate sources?
Ok gotcha, all the regs like NBC, abc, CNN, NPR (but it's sooo boring) Cspan and some websites and blogs as long as they back up their position with facts. I'm going to be honest, I don't consider Fox to be legit and the reason why is because everytime they report something incorrect they take the fall back positing of "they aren't reporters, they're commentators. Fox has, I believe 2 hours of reporting total. I consider it more entertainment than news.
LOL!! You got that right, and a scheme is exactly what they are all consciously or unconsciously engaged in.No you can't reject a fact. You can reject the spin attached to it. But you can't reject the fact.A fact is a fact no matter who speaks it.
And a fact can be twisted by added commentary and when taken out of context.. which is status quo for sites like Huffy Puffy...
Sorry Carby... those sites are not legit nor credible
See... I am one who does not accept commentary or blogs from any side... while you are one to accept it if it fits your agenda
The reason people like you want to dismiss 'unfriendly' sources as evidence is because you know the friendly ones won't do your agenda any harm. It's a very transparent scheme.
Exactly. Which should indicate to ANY and ALL thinking individuals that there's no such thing as a "Librul Meedja" only a Corporate Media.All major news outlets are looking for ratings.
For instance CNN revived a 1 year old story about a controversial video game.
It was one of those 'look at this awful video game/movie/book someone made' stories with no real substance.
It's a video game that's only available in Japan and in Japanese (unless you pirate it) and is a couple years old.
Why did they bring it up? There seemed to be no real reason.
Ratings = advertising dollars. Controversy, dirt and innuendo = ratings. They're giving the public what it wants which says more about us then them.
That's the long and short of it.What sources do Republicans consider legitimate?
Any source which provides opinions telling Republicans why Republicans are correct is considered legitimate by Republicans.
Lefties consume news so they can make an informed opinion.
Righties consume news so they can justify their preconceived uninformed opinions.
its pretty simple
See...? Here goes another one.I always hear news being dismissed because of where it comes from. So I'm curious what news is considered legitimate to Republicans?
You got it bass-ackward CC, republicans have been dealing with liberal news for a hundred years. It's lefties that dismiss news because they don't appreciate fair and balanced.
I'm willing to go to the Liberal Intellectual Elites for news: Jon Stewart, Colbert, Maddow and Wikipedia.
This is the first thread, of many, that I'm going to bookmark.
I predict that I'll have to reference this thread in the near future to a USMB RWer that's either ad-hominemly (sp) dismissing a legitimate source, or is using an illegitimate source that they agree with to bolster one of their nonsensical arguments.
Watch...
This is the first thread, of many, that I'm going to bookmark.
I predict that I'll have to reference this thread in the near future to a USMB RWer that's either ad-hominemly (sp) dismissing a legitimate source, or is using an illegitimate source that they agree with to bolster one of their nonsensical arguments.
Watch...
It's difficult. The right wing is constantly "let down". They will point to Fox or the Heritage Foundation as "proof", but then those sites are discredited, then have to scrub their sites and then the right wing has lost their "link". It's frustrating.
Like the oil pipeline making a millions jobs.
Or the president spending 200 million dollars a day on a "trip".
Or the president hoping he didn't have to take down Bin Laden.
The ones that use facts and reason. Amazing how those pesky things annoy the left.
"A Fox regular once commented to me that she gets more calls from network management about her hair, clothes, and makeup than about what she says."
Is the answer that hard, that you have to ask? Try an actual news source, as opposed to a blog, or an opinion piece, or the website of some agenda-driven political group. While I will still point out the slant in the NY Times' writing and what it is they aren't telling you about the story, they are at least an actual news organization. Huffington Post is a blog. Feminist.com and the NARAL website aren't even THAT good.
Now what, precisely, was hard to figure out about that?
its not a hard question its an opinion question...I take it NY Times is on your list of credible news sources (I think). Is that the only source you deem credible?
Is English not your first language?
"Try an actual news source, as opposed to a blog, or an opinion piece, or the website of some agenda-driven political group."
The NY Times is what we literate people refer to as an "example".
Do you need me to explain the phrase "actual news source" to you, since you needed it repeated from the first time I said it?
Pretty much anything that isn't a long-winded rant on how stupid and racist the "teabaggers" are.
20 views and not one comment....C'mon, I hear all the time the news sources you guys dont accept (Huffpo and others) but what do you accept as credible news sources? Is the question that hard?
Attacking the source is just a rightwinger's way avoiding the argument.
And they won't tell you what sources they consider legitimate, because they don't want to give up that escape mechanism.
Just keep in mind, you only have to prove these rightwing nuts wrong, you don't have to get them to admit they've been proven wrong. If you try to do the latter, they will just wear you out with obstinate denial.
