Another absolutely perfect example of the BIASED MSM!!!!

[Mac1958]

I took the below screen shot for several reasons.
1) 39,000 results stating "Trump anti-immigrant".
2) Can someone explain how MSNBC/TIME can call themselves "objective" professional journalists just
reporting the news when they use the "anti-immigrant"?
For example from the Time article: Poll Shows Limits Of Donald Trump's Anti-Immigrant Rhetoric
"Donald Trump has characterized many undocumented immigrants as criminals or as people who take jobs away from struggling Americans."
Why didn't Time use the term "illegal"? instead Time used "undocumented"?
Because they are biased reporting.
And the VAST majority of Americans that voted for Trump are totally aware this MSM bias and consequently
Trump can SAY anything anymore and the biased MSM blows it 180 degrees from the truth and so
WE DON"T BELIEVE THE MSM!
EVEN Gallup in reporting this bias the fact... why didn't they lead by saying 68% of Americans distrust the media?
Americans' trust and confidence in the mass media "to report the news fully, accurately and fairly" has dropped to its lowest level in Gallup polling history, with 32% saying they have a great deal or fair amount of trust in the media. This is down eight percentage points from last year.
Americans' Trust in Mass Media Sinks to New Low

View attachment 100765

I took the below screen shot for several reasons.
1) 39,000 results stating "Trump anti-immigrant".
2) Can someone explain how MSNBC/TIME can call themselves "objective" professional journalists just
reporting the news when they use the "anti-immigrant"?
For example from the Time article: Poll Shows Limits Of Donald Trump's Anti-Immigrant Rhetoric
"Donald Trump has characterized many undocumented immigrants as criminals or as people who take jobs away from struggling Americans."
Why didn't Time use the term "illegal"? instead Time used "undocumented"?
Because they are biased reporting.
And the VAST majority of Americans that voted for Trump are totally aware this MSM bias and consequently
Trump can SAY anything anymore and the biased MSM blows it 180 degrees from the truth and so
WE DON"T BELIEVE THE MSM!
EVEN Gallup in reporting this bias the fact... why didn't they lead by saying 68% of Americans distrust the media?
Americans' trust and confidence in the mass media "to report the news fully, accurately and fairly" has dropped to its lowest level in Gallup polling history, with 32% saying they have a great deal or fair amount of trust in the media. This is down eight percentage points from last year.
Americans' Trust in Mass Media Sinks to New Low

View attachment 100765

You can probably expect responses using a technique I call "isolation".

What they will do is completely ignore the fact that this story is just a drop in the ocean of examples of media bias. They'll single this one story out, isolate it, mock it, minimize it, deny it -- which is their attempt to minimize the whole "biased media" meme down to an inconsequential pebble.

Watch.
.

I'd like the OP to tell us what objective sources of news we should be following.

Do we all remember when the left, here, there, and everywhere, denied the fact that the MSM was biased. In fact, both they and the MSM denied it, claimed we were overly sensitive, etc.

People ask-------->why is the country so divided. Hellllloooooo! When you have the media leaning so far one way for so long, once new media comes online as it has, it must lean as far right as possible to prove it is not MSM. Therefore, what you have is the left listening to fabrications their guys create, and the right following suit in the opposite direction.

To the people on the left--------------> I am sure you realize that YOUR guys, the MSM; has now gotten caught with their hands in the proverbial cookie jar with the WIKI releases. What this means is----------->none of these sources for any reason are now credible. Doesn't mean they aren't ever telling the truth, but rather, they have an ax to grind so can be ignored. It is kinda like those e-mails that proved climate people were cooking the books. You can't get passed their duplicity with regular people. Doesn't mean they are now not telling the truth, but they can't be trusted any longer for accuracy, since they to have an ax to grind.

This is what happens when those we look to are caught being crooked. Do not blame the right for this at all! Even you people could see how ridiculous it was, and instead of demanding accuracy, you went along because it was in your favor. Well, good luck now convincing anybody but like minded individuals with MSM, or lefty links, of anything that does not think like you! Anything you bring to the forefront with their links as proof can now be pushed aside, and that is sad. Again, you helped do it to yourselves, so don't expect us to feel sorry for you.

One of the most insidious - and destructive - results of the bias is that it is self-sustaining.

In other words, they know they can stir the shit and then report on the stirred-up shit.

A behavior like that will only build on itself, and that's what we've seen.
.

 

[NYcarbineer]

I took the below screen shot for several reasons.
1) 39,000 results stating "Trump anti-immigrant".
2) Can someone explain how MSNBC/TIME can call themselves "objective" professional journalists just
reporting the news when they use the "anti-immigrant"?
For example from the Time article: Poll Shows Limits Of Donald Trump's Anti-Immigrant Rhetoric
"Donald Trump has characterized many undocumented immigrants as criminals or as people who take jobs away from struggling Americans."
Why didn't Time use the term "illegal"? instead Time used "undocumented"?
Because they are biased reporting.
And the VAST majority of Americans that voted for Trump are totally aware this MSM bias and consequently
Trump can SAY anything anymore and the biased MSM blows it 180 degrees from the truth and so
WE DON"T BELIEVE THE MSM!
EVEN Gallup in reporting this bias the fact... why didn't they lead by saying 68% of Americans distrust the media?
Americans' trust and confidence in the mass media "to report the news fully, accurately and fairly" has dropped to its lowest level in Gallup polling history, with 32% saying they have a great deal or fair amount of trust in the media. This is down eight percentage points from last year.
Americans' Trust in Mass Media Sinks to New Low

View attachment 100765

I took the below screen shot for several reasons.
1) 39,000 results stating "Trump anti-immigrant".
2) Can someone explain how MSNBC/TIME can call themselves "objective" professional journalists just
reporting the news when they use the "anti-immigrant"?
For example from the Time article: Poll Shows Limits Of Donald Trump's Anti-Immigrant Rhetoric
"Donald Trump has characterized many undocumented immigrants as criminals or as people who take jobs away from struggling Americans."
Why didn't Time use the term "illegal"? instead Time used "undocumented"?
Because they are biased reporting.
And the VAST majority of Americans that voted for Trump are totally aware this MSM bias and consequently
Trump can SAY anything anymore and the biased MSM blows it 180 degrees from the truth and so
WE DON"T BELIEVE THE MSM!
EVEN Gallup in reporting this bias the fact... why didn't they lead by saying 68% of Americans distrust the media?
Americans' trust and confidence in the mass media "to report the news fully, accurately and fairly" has dropped to its lowest level in Gallup polling history, with 32% saying they have a great deal or fair amount of trust in the media. This is down eight percentage points from last year.
Americans' Trust in Mass Media Sinks to New Low

View attachment 100765

You can probably expect responses using a technique I call "isolation".

What they will do is completely ignore the fact that this story is just a drop in the ocean of examples of media bias. They'll single this one story out, isolate it, mock it, minimize it, deny it -- which is their attempt to minimize the whole "biased media" meme down to an inconsequential pebble.

Watch.
.

I'd like the OP to tell us what objective sources of news we should be following.

Do we all remember when the left, here, there, and everywhere, denied the fact that the MSM was biased. In fact, both they and the MSM denied it, claimed we were overly sensitive, etc.

People ask-------->why is the country so divided. Hellllloooooo! When you have the media leaning so far one way for so long, once new media comes online as it has, it must lean as far right as possible to prove it is not MSM. Therefore, what you have is the left listening to fabrications their guys create, and the right following suit in the opposite direction.

To the people on the left--------------> I am sure you realize that YOUR guys, the MSM; has now gotten caught with their hands in the proverbial cookie jar with the WIKI releases. What this means is----------->none of these sources for any reason are now credible. Doesn't mean they aren't ever telling the truth, but rather, they have an ax to grind so can be ignored. It is kinda like those e-mails that proved climate people were cooking the books. You can't get passed their duplicity with regular people. Doesn't mean they are now not telling the truth, but they can't be trusted any longer for accuracy, since they to have an ax to grind.

This is what happens when those we look to are caught being crooked. Do not blame the right for this at all! Even you people could see how ridiculous it was, and instead of demanding accuracy, you went along because it was in your favor. Well, good luck now convincing anybody but like minded individuals with MSM, or lefty links, of anything that does not think like you! Anything you bring to the forefront with their links as proof can now be pushed aside, and that is sad. Again, you helped do it to yourselves, so don't expect us to feel sorry for you.

I want to know what UNBIASED news sources all you sanctimonious conservatives are using that you feel give you the standing to criticize where liberals get their news.

Can you do that for me? Or admit that you all just patronize rightwing biased media, which makes you just the other side of the same coin.

Can you?

 

[NYcarbineer]

I took the below screen shot for several reasons.
1) 39,000 results stating "Trump anti-immigrant".
2) Can someone explain how MSNBC/TIME can call themselves "objective" professional journalists just
reporting the news when they use the "anti-immigrant"?
For example from the Time article: Poll Shows Limits Of Donald Trump's Anti-Immigrant Rhetoric
"Donald Trump has characterized many undocumented immigrants as criminals or as people who take jobs away from struggling Americans."
Why didn't Time use the term "illegal"? instead Time used "undocumented"?
Because they are biased reporting.
And the VAST majority of Americans that voted for Trump are totally aware this MSM bias and consequently
Trump can SAY anything anymore and the biased MSM blows it 180 degrees from the truth and so
WE DON"T BELIEVE THE MSM!
EVEN Gallup in reporting this bias the fact... why didn't they lead by saying 68% of Americans distrust the media?
Americans' trust and confidence in the mass media "to report the news fully, accurately and fairly" has dropped to its lowest level in Gallup polling history, with 32% saying they have a great deal or fair amount of trust in the media. This is down eight percentage points from last year.
Americans' Trust in Mass Media Sinks to New Low

View attachment 100765

I took the below screen shot for several reasons.
1) 39,000 results stating "Trump anti-immigrant".
2) Can someone explain how MSNBC/TIME can call themselves "objective" professional journalists just
reporting the news when they use the "anti-immigrant"?
For example from the Time article: Poll Shows Limits Of Donald Trump's Anti-Immigrant Rhetoric
"Donald Trump has characterized many undocumented immigrants as criminals or as people who take jobs away from struggling Americans."
Why didn't Time use the term "illegal"? instead Time used "undocumented"?
Because they are biased reporting.
And the VAST majority of Americans that voted for Trump are totally aware this MSM bias and consequently
Trump can SAY anything anymore and the biased MSM blows it 180 degrees from the truth and so
WE DON"T BELIEVE THE MSM!
EVEN Gallup in reporting this bias the fact... why didn't they lead by saying 68% of Americans distrust the media?
Americans' trust and confidence in the mass media "to report the news fully, accurately and fairly" has dropped to its lowest level in Gallup polling history, with 32% saying they have a great deal or fair amount of trust in the media. This is down eight percentage points from last year.
Americans' Trust in Mass Media Sinks to New Low

View attachment 100765

You can probably expect responses using a technique I call "isolation".

What they will do is completely ignore the fact that this story is just a drop in the ocean of examples of media bias. They'll single this one story out, isolate it, mock it, minimize it, deny it -- which is their attempt to minimize the whole "biased media" meme down to an inconsequential pebble.

Watch.
.

I'd like the OP to tell us what objective sources of news we should be following.

Do we all remember when the left, here, there, and everywhere, denied the fact that the MSM was biased. In fact, both they and the MSM denied it, claimed we were overly sensitive, etc.

People ask-------->why is the country so divided. Hellllloooooo! When you have the media leaning so far one way for so long, once new media comes online as it has, it must lean as far right as possible to prove it is not MSM. Therefore, what you have is the left listening to fabrications their guys create, and the right following suit in the opposite direction.

To the people on the left--------------> I am sure you realize that YOUR guys, the MSM; has now gotten caught with their hands in the proverbial cookie jar with the WIKI releases. What this means is----------->none of these sources for any reason are now credible. Doesn't mean they aren't ever telling the truth, but rather, they have an ax to grind so can be ignored. It is kinda like those e-mails that proved climate people were cooking the books. You can't get passed their duplicity with regular people. Doesn't mean they are now not telling the truth, but they can't be trusted any longer for accuracy, since they to have an ax to grind.

This is what happens when those we look to are caught being crooked. Do not blame the right for this at all! Even you people could see how ridiculous it was, and instead of demanding accuracy, you went along because it was in your favor. Well, good luck now convincing anybody but like minded individuals with MSM, or lefty links, of anything that does not think like you! Anything you bring to the forefront with their links as proof can now be pushed aside, and that is sad. Again, you helped do it to yourselves, so don't expect us to feel sorry for you.

One of the most insidious - and destructive - results of the bias is that it is self-sustaining.

In other words, they know they can stir the shit and then report on the stirred-up shit.

A behavior like that will only build on itself, and that's what we've seen.
.

Tell us what unbiased media you use to get your news.

 

[Mac1958]

I took the below screen shot for several reasons.
1) 39,000 results stating "Trump anti-immigrant".
2) Can someone explain how MSNBC/TIME can call themselves "objective" professional journalists just
reporting the news when they use the "anti-immigrant"?
For example from the Time article: Poll Shows Limits Of Donald Trump's Anti-Immigrant Rhetoric
"Donald Trump has characterized many undocumented immigrants as criminals or as people who take jobs away from struggling Americans."
Why didn't Time use the term "illegal"? instead Time used "undocumented"?
Because they are biased reporting.
And the VAST majority of Americans that voted for Trump are totally aware this MSM bias and consequently
Trump can SAY anything anymore and the biased MSM blows it 180 degrees from the truth and so
WE DON"T BELIEVE THE MSM!
EVEN Gallup in reporting this bias the fact... why didn't they lead by saying 68% of Americans distrust the media?
Americans' trust and confidence in the mass media "to report the news fully, accurately and fairly" has dropped to its lowest level in Gallup polling history, with 32% saying they have a great deal or fair amount of trust in the media. This is down eight percentage points from last year.
Americans' Trust in Mass Media Sinks to New Low

View attachment 100765

I took the below screen shot for several reasons.
1) 39,000 results stating "Trump anti-immigrant".
2) Can someone explain how MSNBC/TIME can call themselves "objective" professional journalists just
reporting the news when they use the "anti-immigrant"?
For example from the Time article: Poll Shows Limits Of Donald Trump's Anti-Immigrant Rhetoric
"Donald Trump has characterized many undocumented immigrants as criminals or as people who take jobs away from struggling Americans."
Why didn't Time use the term "illegal"? instead Time used "undocumented"?
Because they are biased reporting.
And the VAST majority of Americans that voted for Trump are totally aware this MSM bias and consequently
Trump can SAY anything anymore and the biased MSM blows it 180 degrees from the truth and so
WE DON"T BELIEVE THE MSM!
EVEN Gallup in reporting this bias the fact... why didn't they lead by saying 68% of Americans distrust the media?
Americans' trust and confidence in the mass media "to report the news fully, accurately and fairly" has dropped to its lowest level in Gallup polling history, with 32% saying they have a great deal or fair amount of trust in the media. This is down eight percentage points from last year.
Americans' Trust in Mass Media Sinks to New Low

View attachment 100765

You can probably expect responses using a technique I call "isolation".

What they will do is completely ignore the fact that this story is just a drop in the ocean of examples of media bias. They'll single this one story out, isolate it, mock it, minimize it, deny it -- which is their attempt to minimize the whole "biased media" meme down to an inconsequential pebble.

Watch.
.

I'd like the OP to tell us what objective sources of news we should be following.

Do we all remember when the left, here, there, and everywhere, denied the fact that the MSM was biased. In fact, both they and the MSM denied it, claimed we were overly sensitive, etc.

People ask-------->why is the country so divided. Hellllloooooo! When you have the media leaning so far one way for so long, once new media comes online as it has, it must lean as far right as possible to prove it is not MSM. Therefore, what you have is the left listening to fabrications their guys create, and the right following suit in the opposite direction.

To the people on the left--------------> I am sure you realize that YOUR guys, the MSM; has now gotten caught with their hands in the proverbial cookie jar with the WIKI releases. What this means is----------->none of these sources for any reason are now credible. Doesn't mean they aren't ever telling the truth, but rather, they have an ax to grind so can be ignored. It is kinda like those e-mails that proved climate people were cooking the books. You can't get passed their duplicity with regular people. Doesn't mean they are now not telling the truth, but they can't be trusted any longer for accuracy, since they to have an ax to grind.

This is what happens when those we look to are caught being crooked. Do not blame the right for this at all! Even you people could see how ridiculous it was, and instead of demanding accuracy, you went along because it was in your favor. Well, good luck now convincing anybody but like minded individuals with MSM, or lefty links, of anything that does not think like you! Anything you bring to the forefront with their links as proof can now be pushed aside, and that is sad. Again, you helped do it to yourselves, so don't expect us to feel sorry for you.

One of the most insidious - and destructive - results of the bias is that it is self-sustaining.

In other words, they know they can stir the shit and then report on the stirred-up shit.

A behavior like that will only build on itself, and that's what we've seen.
.

Tell us what unbiased media you use to get your news.

I can't think of any.

Nor could I have, back when I was in it for nearly 20 years.

Why would you ask such a meaningless question?
.

 

[Tehon]

I took the below screen shot for several reasons.
1) 39,000 results stating "Trump anti-immigrant".
2) Can someone explain how MSNBC/TIME can call themselves "objective" professional journalists just
reporting the news when they use the "anti-immigrant"?
For example from the Time article: Poll Shows Limits Of Donald Trump's Anti-Immigrant Rhetoric
"Donald Trump has characterized many undocumented immigrants as criminals or as people who take jobs away from struggling Americans."
Why didn't Time use the term "illegal"? instead Time used "undocumented"?
Because they are biased reporting.
And the VAST majority of Americans that voted for Trump are totally aware this MSM bias and consequently
Trump can SAY anything anymore and the biased MSM blows it 180 degrees from the truth and so
WE DON"T BELIEVE THE MSM!
EVEN Gallup in reporting this bias the fact... why didn't they lead by saying 68% of Americans distrust the media?
Americans' trust and confidence in the mass media "to report the news fully, accurately and fairly" has dropped to its lowest level in Gallup polling history, with 32% saying they have a great deal or fair amount of trust in the media. This is down eight percentage points from last year.
Americans' Trust in Mass Media Sinks to New Low

View attachment 100765

Is undocumented a poor description, or just not one that fits your own bias?

Every illegal has broken our laws, we could call them criminals if you prefer a more accurate description.

It really makes no difference to me. I understand your point of view. I also understand that the laws have been largely ignored for decades now. For this reason I don't have a problem with undocumented being used as an adjective. It has been accepted.

 

[BluesLegend]

I took the below screen shot for several reasons.
1) 39,000 results stating "Trump anti-immigrant".
2) Can someone explain how MSNBC/TIME can call themselves "objective" professional journalists just
reporting the news when they use the "anti-immigrant"?
For example from the Time article: Poll Shows Limits Of Donald Trump's Anti-Immigrant Rhetoric
"Donald Trump has characterized many undocumented immigrants as criminals or as people who take jobs away from struggling Americans."
Why didn't Time use the term "illegal"? instead Time used "undocumented"?
Because they are biased reporting.
And the VAST majority of Americans that voted for Trump are totally aware this MSM bias and consequently
Trump can SAY anything anymore and the biased MSM blows it 180 degrees from the truth and so
WE DON"T BELIEVE THE MSM!
EVEN Gallup in reporting this bias the fact... why didn't they lead by saying 68% of Americans distrust the media?
Americans' trust and confidence in the mass media "to report the news fully, accurately and fairly" has dropped to its lowest level in Gallup polling history, with 32% saying they have a great deal or fair amount of trust in the media. This is down eight percentage points from last year.
Americans' Trust in Mass Media Sinks to New Low

View attachment 100765

Is undocumented a poor description, or just not one that fits your own bias?

Every illegal has broken our laws, we could call them criminals if you prefer a more accurate description.

It really makes no difference to me. I understand your point of view. I also understand that the laws have been largely ignored for decades now. For this reason I don't have a problem with undocumented being used as an adjective. It has been accepted.

1/3 of all illegals are participating in a tax fraud scheme that cost American taxpayers over $4 billion each year. And each year more illegals learn how and join in. Does that sound like a law abiding person who just lost their fucking documentation?

 

[dcbl]

1/3 of all illegals are participating in a tax fraud scheme that cost American taxpayers over $4 billion each year.

link?

I'd love to see info on that

 

[healthmyths]

I took the below screen shot for several reasons.
1) 39,000 results stating "Trump anti-immigrant".
2) Can someone explain how MSNBC/TIME can call themselves "objective" professional journalists just
reporting the news when they use the "anti-immigrant"?
For example from the Time article: Poll Shows Limits Of Donald Trump's Anti-Immigrant Rhetoric
"Donald Trump has characterized many undocumented immigrants as criminals or as people who take jobs away from struggling Americans."
Why didn't Time use the term "illegal"? instead Time used "undocumented"?
Because they are biased reporting.
And the VAST majority of Americans that voted for Trump are totally aware this MSM bias and consequently
Trump can SAY anything anymore and the biased MSM blows it 180 degrees from the truth and so
WE DON"T BELIEVE THE MSM!
EVEN Gallup in reporting this bias the fact... why didn't they lead by saying 68% of Americans distrust the media?
Americans' trust and confidence in the mass media "to report the news fully, accurately and fairly" has dropped to its lowest level in Gallup polling history, with 32% saying they have a great deal or fair amount of trust in the media. This is down eight percentage points from last year.
Americans' Trust in Mass Media Sinks to New Low

View attachment 100765

I took the below screen shot for several reasons.
1) 39,000 results stating "Trump anti-immigrant".
2) Can someone explain how MSNBC/TIME can call themselves "objective" professional journalists just
reporting the news when they use the "anti-immigrant"?
For example from the Time article: Poll Shows Limits Of Donald Trump's Anti-Immigrant Rhetoric
"Donald Trump has characterized many undocumented immigrants as criminals or as people who take jobs away from struggling Americans."
Why didn't Time use the term "illegal"? instead Time used "undocumented"?
Because they are biased reporting.
And the VAST majority of Americans that voted for Trump are totally aware this MSM bias and consequently
Trump can SAY anything anymore and the biased MSM blows it 180 degrees from the truth and so
WE DON"T BELIEVE THE MSM!
EVEN Gallup in reporting this bias the fact... why didn't they lead by saying 68% of Americans distrust the media?
Americans' trust and confidence in the mass media "to report the news fully, accurately and fairly" has dropped to its lowest level in Gallup polling history, with 32% saying they have a great deal or fair amount of trust in the media. This is down eight percentage points from last year.
Americans' Trust in Mass Media Sinks to New Low

View attachment 100765

You can probably expect responses using a technique I call "isolation".

What they will do is completely ignore the fact that this story is just a drop in the ocean of examples of media bias. They'll single this one story out, isolate it, mock it, minimize it, deny it -- which is their attempt to minimize the whole "biased media" meme down to an inconsequential pebble.

Watch.
.

I'd like the OP to tell us what objective sources of news we should be following.

Do we all remember when the left, here, there, and everywhere, denied the fact that the MSM was biased. In fact, both they and the MSM denied it, claimed we were overly sensitive, etc.

People ask-------->why is the country so divided. Hellllloooooo! When you have the media leaning so far one way for so long, once new media comes online as it has, it must lean as far right as possible to prove it is not MSM. Therefore, what you have is the left listening to fabrications their guys create, and the right following suit in the opposite direction.

To the people on the left--------------> I am sure you realize that YOUR guys, the MSM; has now gotten caught with their hands in the proverbial cookie jar with the WIKI releases. What this means is----------->none of these sources for any reason are now credible. Doesn't mean they aren't ever telling the truth, but rather, they have an ax to grind so can be ignored. It is kinda like those e-mails that proved climate people were cooking the books. You can't get passed their duplicity with regular people. Doesn't mean they are now not telling the truth, but they can't be trusted any longer for accuracy, since they to have an ax to grind.

This is what happens when those we look to are caught being crooked. Do not blame the right for this at all! Even you people could see how ridiculous it was, and instead of demanding accuracy, you went along because it was in your favor. Well, good luck now convincing anybody but like minded individuals with MSM, or lefty links, of anything that does not think like you! Anything you bring to the forefront with their links as proof can now be pushed aside, and that is sad. Again, you helped do it to yourselves, so don't expect us to feel sorry for you.

I want to know what UNBIASED news sources all you sanctimonious conservatives are using that you feel give you the standing to criticize where liberals get their news.

Can you do that for me? Or admit that you all just patronize rightwing biased media, which makes you just the other side of the same coin.

Can you?

Unlike you I guess I don't just get NEWS from one source. But more importantly I then do a little more research based on the EXPERIENCE
that the MSM has presented BIASED NEWS.
Fortunately for me I had several courses in college in journalism and one of them was called "Backgrounding the News" meaning looking a little deeper
then just the headlines.
See that's the problem with many people and possibly you. You take the "headlines" Trump anti-immigrant" and make it sound like the rule.
Thus you form an opinion. Unlike me with my experiences I doubt the headlines and dig deeper and for instance TRUMP is married to a LEGAL immigrant".
My personal experience is my "legal" immigrant daughter-in-law both of whom followed the laws of America and became citizens.
So I and millions like me find the MSM bias when they declare Trump Anti-immigrant as that makes ME also "anti-immigrant" which is so far from the
truth!

 

[bullwinkle]

I took the below screen shot for several reasons.
1) 39,000 results stating "Trump anti-immigrant".
2) Can someone explain how MSNBC/TIME can call themselves "objective" professional journalists just
reporting the news when they use the "anti-immigrant"?
For example from the Time article: Poll Shows Limits Of Donald Trump's Anti-Immigrant Rhetoric
"Donald Trump has characterized many undocumented immigrants as criminals or as people who take jobs away from struggling Americans."
Why didn't Time use the term "illegal"? instead Time used "undocumented"?
Because they are biased reporting.
And the VAST majority of Americans that voted for Trump are totally aware this MSM bias and consequently
Trump can SAY anything anymore and the biased MSM blows it 180 degrees from the truth and so
WE DON"T BELIEVE THE MSM!
EVEN Gallup in reporting this bias the fact... why didn't they lead by saying 68% of Americans distrust the media?
Americans' trust and confidence in the mass media "to report the news fully, accurately and fairly" has dropped to its lowest level in Gallup polling history, with 32% saying they have a great deal or fair amount of trust in the media. This is down eight percentage points from last year.
Americans' Trust in Mass Media Sinks to New Low

View attachment 100765

Healthmyths, you leave out where to look for 'real news' or 'unbiased news'. Where do you go to learn news "fully, accurately and fairly"? I have often cited headlined links here that the attached reports belie, so that the headline implies one thing and the following article states the opposite. So there is at least one more person who challenges implied news reports from all sources, and I suspect most others are discerning too. You appear to think of yourself as the only one. Please also allow me to point out that it was no media, but Trump himself, that spoke clearly 'anti-immigrant-ese' (and not legal or illegal) when he told a cheering mob of Americans that an Indiana judge couldn't be fair towards him because his parents came from Mexico...land of rapists and murderers.

 

[Kosh]

I'd like the OP to tell us what objective sources of news we should be following.

Any source your Obama attacks.....

No, you people bitch about biased media all the time, so tell us the unbiased sources where YOU get your news.

Or admit you can't, or won't.

Says the far left drone that only believes far left state run news sources!

 

[dcbl]

Mexico...land of rapists and murderers.

* and drug dealers

but some of them, we can assume, are good people...

 

[imawhosure]

I took the below screen shot for several reasons.
1) 39,000 results stating "Trump anti-immigrant".
2) Can someone explain how MSNBC/TIME can call themselves "objective" professional journalists just
reporting the news when they use the "anti-immigrant"?
For example from the Time article: Poll Shows Limits Of Donald Trump's Anti-Immigrant Rhetoric
"Donald Trump has characterized many undocumented immigrants as criminals or as people who take jobs away from struggling Americans."
Why didn't Time use the term "illegal"? instead Time used "undocumented"?
Because they are biased reporting.
And the VAST majority of Americans that voted for Trump are totally aware this MSM bias and consequently
Trump can SAY anything anymore and the biased MSM blows it 180 degrees from the truth and so
WE DON"T BELIEVE THE MSM!
EVEN Gallup in reporting this bias the fact... why didn't they lead by saying 68% of Americans distrust the media?
Americans' trust and confidence in the mass media "to report the news fully, accurately and fairly" has dropped to its lowest level in Gallup polling history, with 32% saying they have a great deal or fair amount of trust in the media. This is down eight percentage points from last year.
Americans' Trust in Mass Media Sinks to New Low

View attachment 100765

I took the below screen shot for several reasons.
1) 39,000 results stating "Trump anti-immigrant".
2) Can someone explain how MSNBC/TIME can call themselves "objective" professional journalists just
reporting the news when they use the "anti-immigrant"?
For example from the Time article: Poll Shows Limits Of Donald Trump's Anti-Immigrant Rhetoric
"Donald Trump has characterized many undocumented immigrants as criminals or as people who take jobs away from struggling Americans."
Why didn't Time use the term "illegal"? instead Time used "undocumented"?
Because they are biased reporting.
And the VAST majority of Americans that voted for Trump are totally aware this MSM bias and consequently
Trump can SAY anything anymore and the biased MSM blows it 180 degrees from the truth and so
WE DON"T BELIEVE THE MSM!
EVEN Gallup in reporting this bias the fact... why didn't they lead by saying 68% of Americans distrust the media?
Americans' trust and confidence in the mass media "to report the news fully, accurately and fairly" has dropped to its lowest level in Gallup polling history, with 32% saying they have a great deal or fair amount of trust in the media. This is down eight percentage points from last year.
Americans' Trust in Mass Media Sinks to New Low

View attachment 100765

You can probably expect responses using a technique I call "isolation".

What they will do is completely ignore the fact that this story is just a drop in the ocean of examples of media bias. They'll single this one story out, isolate it, mock it, minimize it, deny it -- which is their attempt to minimize the whole "biased media" meme down to an inconsequential pebble.

Watch.
.

I'd like the OP to tell us what objective sources of news we should be following.

Do we all remember when the left, here, there, and everywhere, denied the fact that the MSM was biased. In fact, both they and the MSM denied it, claimed we were overly sensitive, etc.

People ask-------->why is the country so divided. Hellllloooooo! When you have the media leaning so far one way for so long, once new media comes online as it has, it must lean as far right as possible to prove it is not MSM. Therefore, what you have is the left listening to fabrications their guys create, and the right following suit in the opposite direction.

To the people on the left--------------> I am sure you realize that YOUR guys, the MSM; has now gotten caught with their hands in the proverbial cookie jar with the WIKI releases. What this means is----------->none of these sources for any reason are now credible. Doesn't mean they aren't ever telling the truth, but rather, they have an ax to grind so can be ignored. It is kinda like those e-mails that proved climate people were cooking the books. You can't get passed their duplicity with regular people. Doesn't mean they are now not telling the truth, but they can't be trusted any longer for accuracy, since they to have an ax to grind.

This is what happens when those we look to are caught being crooked. Do not blame the right for this at all! Even you people could see how ridiculous it was, and instead of demanding accuracy, you went along because it was in your favor. Well, good luck now convincing anybody but like minded individuals with MSM, or lefty links, of anything that does not think like you! Anything you bring to the forefront with their links as proof can now be pushed aside, and that is sad. Again, you helped do it to yourselves, so don't expect us to feel sorry for you.

I want to know what UNBIASED news sources all you sanctimonious conservatives are using that you feel give you the standing to criticize where liberals get their news.

Can you do that for me? Or admit that you all just patronize rightwing biased media, which makes you just the other side of the same coin.

Can you?

See, you do not get it NY! We are not insisting what you say is correct, or incorrect. What we are saying is------->your sources are now untrustworthy, and it has been proven. Therefore, any links as proof to the MSM, or links that make a talking point from what they say is now null and void. You now have to think for yourselves, not parrot any longer.

Did I not see you in a thread yesterday (if not sorry) where they discussed with PROOF POSITIVE Wisconsin voting machines were tampered with?!?!?!?! Wasn't there a link to the story there, and every leftist frothing at the mouth was basically saying.......see, see!

Your narratives are phony from biased media, PERIOD! Ummm, weren't you one of the people posting consistently with LINKS, that there was no way Trump could win? The blue wall was impenetrable? Links showed Hillary would carry 360 to 370 electoral college votes!

So when you ask US to tell YOU where these places are to go to for honest, unbiased, stories, the only thing we can tell you is-----------> maybe you should start out by looking in the archives for those services who actually gave Trump a chance. Or maybe those who actually reported on how the public really viewed Hilly. Or maybe the service that actually told you that the senate was going to probably stay easily in Republican hands. (which was far easier to predict than Trump/Hilly because it was a much smaller sample size)

I know, I know, most of those services that reported correctly, are NOT telling YOU what you want to hear. Fine! But what do you really want NY? Accuracy, or would rather be told what you want to hear, and wake up constantly and understand that you have been manipulated!?!?!?! That is the difference between right and left-------->we want to know, then try and fix it. The left wants to be told everything is wonderful, so they don't have to do anything. (just my opinion, but I believe accurate)

 

[healthmyths]

I'd like the OP to tell us what objective sources of news we should be following.

For the most part there AREN"T any "objective" sources! The closest is Fox news as they seem to at least present a counterbalance to these people.

 

[Tehon]

I took the below screen shot for several reasons.
1) 39,000 results stating "Trump anti-immigrant".
2) Can someone explain how MSNBC/TIME can call themselves "objective" professional journalists just
reporting the news when they use the "anti-immigrant"?
For example from the Time article: Poll Shows Limits Of Donald Trump's Anti-Immigrant Rhetoric
"Donald Trump has characterized many undocumented immigrants as criminals or as people who take jobs away from struggling Americans."
Why didn't Time use the term "illegal"? instead Time used "undocumented"?
Because they are biased reporting.
And the VAST majority of Americans that voted for Trump are totally aware this MSM bias and consequently
Trump can SAY anything anymore and the biased MSM blows it 180 degrees from the truth and so
WE DON"T BELIEVE THE MSM!
EVEN Gallup in reporting this bias the fact... why didn't they lead by saying 68% of Americans distrust the media?
Americans' trust and confidence in the mass media "to report the news fully, accurately and fairly" has dropped to its lowest level in Gallup polling history, with 32% saying they have a great deal or fair amount of trust in the media. This is down eight percentage points from last year.
Americans' Trust in Mass Media Sinks to New Low

View attachment 100765

Is undocumented a poor description, or just not one that fits your own bias?

Every illegal has broken our laws, we could call them criminals if you prefer a more accurate description.

It really makes no difference to me. I understand your point of view. I also understand that the laws have been largely ignored for decades now. For this reason I don't have a problem with undocumented being used as an adjective. It has been accepted.

1/3 of all illegals are participating in a tax fraud scheme that cost American taxpayers over $4 billion each year. And each year more illegals learn how and join in. Does that sound like a law abiding person who just lost their fucking documentation?

I will assume what you say is true and wish Trump well in putting an end to it.

Farmers in the area which I live painted a tractor trailer "Farmers for Trump" and placed it along the local highway. During the campaign Trump held an event for them. I would love to see Trump send immigration here and chase the farmers labor back to their homeland. But I'm guessing it won't happen.

 

[BluesLegend]

1/3 of all illegals are participating in a tax fraud scheme that cost American taxpayers over $4 billion each year.

link?

I'd love to see info on that

This problem has been debated in congress. The IRS claims that it is powerless to stop the fraud, and that congress must correct the problem. Dem's in congress have repeatedly blocked attempts to fix it.

The child tax credit refund allows someone to get more back in a refund than they paid in taxes. You can get a refund even if you paid no taxes. But this credit is only available to US citizens. Illegals who are not entitled to this credit are filing returns claiming 6, 8, 12 kids scoring refunds some as high as $18,000. They are claiming kids that are still back in Mexico who have never set foot in the USA. They are claiming kids that are not even their kids but the kids of family members.

 

[TheDude]

MSN? All of them and liberal to extreme. Flash on the Yahoo page most anytime. Look at the wording of the titles and the trickery in their "stories". They paint pictures to suit their bias, and that of the owners.

Yahoo

 

[healthmyths]

I took the below screen shot for several reasons.
1) 39,000 results stating "Trump anti-immigrant".
2) Can someone explain how MSNBC/TIME can call themselves "objective" professional journalists just
reporting the news when they use the "anti-immigrant"?
For example from the Time article: Poll Shows Limits Of Donald Trump's Anti-Immigrant Rhetoric
"Donald Trump has characterized many undocumented immigrants as criminals or as people who take jobs away from struggling Americans."
Why didn't Time use the term "illegal"? instead Time used "undocumented"?
Because they are biased reporting.
And the VAST majority of Americans that voted for Trump are totally aware this MSM bias and consequently
Trump can SAY anything anymore and the biased MSM blows it 180 degrees from the truth and so
WE DON"T BELIEVE THE MSM!
EVEN Gallup in reporting this bias the fact... why didn't they lead by saying 68% of Americans distrust the media?
Americans' trust and confidence in the mass media "to report the news fully, accurately and fairly" has dropped to its lowest level in Gallup polling history, with 32% saying they have a great deal or fair amount of trust in the media. This is down eight percentage points from last year.
Americans' Trust in Mass Media Sinks to New Low

View attachment 100765

Healthmyths, you leave out where to look for 'real news' or 'unbiased news'. Where do you go to learn news "fully, accurately and fairly"? I have often cited headlined links here that the attached reports belie, so that the headline implies one thing and the following article states the opposite. So there is at least one more person who challenges implied news reports from all sources, and I suspect most others are discerning too. You appear to think of yourself as the only one. Please also allow me to point out that it was no media, but Trump himself, that spoke clearly 'anti-immigrant-ese' (and not legal or illegal) when he told a cheering mob of Americans that an Indiana judge couldn't be fair towards him because his parents came from Mexico...land of rapists and murderers.

Here is exactly what Trump said:

We have a very hostile judge because, to be honest with you, the judge should’ve thrown the case out on summary judgement.
But because it was me and because there’s a hostility toward me by the judge, tremendous hostility, beyond belief.
I believe he happens to be Spanish, which is fine. He is Hispanic, which is fine.
And we haven't asked for recusal, which we may do. But we have a judge who is very hostile. Should’ve been thrown out. Wasn’t thrown out.”
http://www.indystar.com/story/news/2016/06/11/what-trump-has-said-judge-curiel/85641242/

Where in that statement is there ANY indication that Trump spoke in "anti-immigrant-see"????
Did he say being of Spanish descent was BAD??? NO! He said "which is fine"~~~

But you and the MSM read into this comment "anti-immigrant"!
So once again I've proven to you how most people JUST reading the headlines assume what they read is true!
With my jaundiced and experienced questioning of ALL MSM headlines/news I always dig deeper and yup.... BIASED!!!

 

[dannyboys]

Imagine if hundreds of very qualified 'illegals' were hanging out at the back doors of CNN and MSNBC who had the training and background in all aspects of operating the technology as well as the employees currently employed.
And these 'illegals' were offering to work for half the pay currently being paid by CNN/MSNBC.
Rachel Madcow and Don Lemon would be standing at the back doors waving fucking fully automatic weapons at the 'illegals'.
The fact that virtually 100% of the 'illegals are totally illiterate so aren't threatening the fucking LIBs in their 'bubbles' is the only reason the LIB MSM are supporting open borders......and of course the knowledge that 100% of the illegals will/would vote for 'The Santa Claus Party' some day.

 

[healthmyths]

I took the below screen shot for several reasons.
1) 39,000 results stating "Trump anti-immigrant".
2) Can someone explain how MSNBC/TIME can call themselves "objective" professional journalists just
reporting the news when they use the "anti-immigrant"?
For example from the Time article: Poll Shows Limits Of Donald Trump's Anti-Immigrant Rhetoric
"Donald Trump has characterized many undocumented immigrants as criminals or as people who take jobs away from struggling Americans."
Why didn't Time use the term "illegal"? instead Time used "undocumented"?
Because they are biased reporting.
And the VAST majority of Americans that voted for Trump are totally aware this MSM bias and consequently
Trump can SAY anything anymore and the biased MSM blows it 180 degrees from the truth and so
WE DON"T BELIEVE THE MSM!
EVEN Gallup in reporting this bias the fact... why didn't they lead by saying 68% of Americans distrust the media?
Americans' trust and confidence in the mass media "to report the news fully, accurately and fairly" has dropped to its lowest level in Gallup polling history, with 32% saying they have a great deal or fair amount of trust in the media. This is down eight percentage points from last year.
Americans' Trust in Mass Media Sinks to New Low

View attachment 100765

Is undocumented a poor description, or just not one that fits your own bias?

No there really isn't any difference...except because of the bias you are right.
What we are discussing though is the MSM bias in NOT using the correct adjective when declaring "Trump is anti-immigrant".
Replace the adjective "illegal" with "undocumented" then. But that's not what 39,000 results have shown.
They like you and the MSM inaccurately and biasedly declare "Trump anti-immigrant"! That is wrong.

 

[Tehon]

I took the below screen shot for several reasons.
1) 39,000 results stating "Trump anti-immigrant".
2) Can someone explain how MSNBC/TIME can call themselves "objective" professional journalists just
reporting the news when they use the "anti-immigrant"?
For example from the Time article: Poll Shows Limits Of Donald Trump's Anti-Immigrant Rhetoric
"Donald Trump has characterized many undocumented immigrants as criminals or as people who take jobs away from struggling Americans."
Why didn't Time use the term "illegal"? instead Time used "undocumented"?
Because they are biased reporting.
And the VAST majority of Americans that voted for Trump are totally aware this MSM bias and consequently
Trump can SAY anything anymore and the biased MSM blows it 180 degrees from the truth and so
WE DON"T BELIEVE THE MSM!
EVEN Gallup in reporting this bias the fact... why didn't they lead by saying 68% of Americans distrust the media?
Americans' trust and confidence in the mass media "to report the news fully, accurately and fairly" has dropped to its lowest level in Gallup polling history, with 32% saying they have a great deal or fair amount of trust in the media. This is down eight percentage points from last year.
Americans' Trust in Mass Media Sinks to New Low

View attachment 100765

Is undocumented a poor description, or just not one that fits your own bias?

No there really isn't any difference...except because of the bias you are right.
What we are discussing though is the MSM bias in NOT using the correct adjective when declaring "Trump is anti-immigrant".
Replace the adjective "illegal" with "undocumented" then. But that's not what 39,000 results have shown.
They like you and the MSM inaccurately and biasedly declare "Trump anti-immigrant"! That is wrong.

I get it.
And I never described Trump as anti immigrant.
But our open border policy has become the norm so there really is no need for an adjective to describe immigrant.