I sincerely give credit to the HuffPo for writing that about a liberal. They usually seem to look the other way for those with the "D" next to their name.
This is a trope that hasnt been true for probably a decade
Greg Gutfeld was still writing there in 2008.
Huffington Post's bias was always overstated. People acted like it was the Nation or something, but it was closer to a tabloid for Democrats.
You miss the point. It started turning hard progressive about a decade ago.
But why do you rail on a news source with a progressive tilt not say anything about a news source with a conservative tilt?
Oh Hondo...
Oh you don't like the question?
No, I don't care your question, nor the issue that much. Mariot said HuffPo turned away from "looking the other way" on Dem misdeeds a decade ago, as if to say HuffPo became less strident. I don't know how much HuffPo ignores now or then, but the site was started with help from Andrew Breitbart in 2004-05 as more left-of-centerish answer to Drudge. Greg Gutfeld was still writing there in mid-2008. Other conservatives or libertarians wrote there in that time too, but I don't remember who. My point is that HuffPo turned harder left about 10-11 years ago, as Adriana's politics turned harder left. It didn't moderate, just the opposite. If you take that as railing, that's on you.
As a "policy stance," for lack of a better term, I really don't care much about any media outlet's ideological or partisan bent. The important thing is to recognize all media sources and all individual journalists have a point of view.
Yeah you know more about their history than I do. I have never been to their website, just some of their columns come up in my feed and they are never ones negative about Democrats. I read some of the articles, some are awful.
Well each side plays to their respective base in the media. You might not agree with this, but Conservatives generally want to read more opinionated writing and liberals general want to read more factual based writing (I'm not meaning truth, as you can lie with facts, more meaning the writing style). Especially news sources like Vox, which is liberal but everything is written in a factual context. But you read daily caller and it's more from an emotional context.
That's why it's important to read both sides.
Who told you that?
No one. Just gathered that from reading each respective side. Read a Vox article then read a daily caller article on the same topic. Granted this is TV, but watch Rachel maddow then watch Tucker Carlson. Watch their style in how they present information.
I'm not saying conservative sites aren't factual. Just pay attention to the style on how the information is laid out.
Kunt logic, is there anything it can't do? Lets compare to things that aren't equal and draw some kind of conclusion from that comparison. Read Buzzfeed and then read a Heritage Foundation article on the same topic. Obviously the liberals aren't interested in facts.
Stupid, pathological liar and a Kunt. You're a hell of guy Hondo.
Well heritage foundation did invent Obamacare. So there's that.
Lie but one made out of stupidity and the fact that you're a liberal talking point parrot not malice. Hondo is more interested in fact!!!
The core of Obamacare came out of Heritage in the 90s and was supported by congressional republicans at the time, and then was implemented by Mitt Romney when he was the governor of Massachusetts. Maybe you should take a break for awhile, bob.
I sincerely give credit to the HuffPo for writing that about a liberal. They usually seem to look the other way for those with the "D" next to their name.
This is a trope that hasnt been true for probably a decade
Greg Gutfeld was still writing there in 2008.
Huffington Post's bias was always overstated. People acted like it was the Nation or something, but it was closer to a tabloid for Democrats.
You miss the point. It started turning hard progressive about a decade ago.
But why do you rail on a news source with a progressive tilt not say anything about a news source with a conservative tilt?
Oh Hondo...
Oh you don't like the question?
No, I don't care your question, nor the issue that much. Mariot said HuffPo turned away from "looking the other way" on Dem misdeeds a decade ago, as if to say HuffPo became less strident. I don't know how much HuffPo ignores now or then, but the site was started with help from Andrew Breitbart in 2004-05 as more left-of-centerish answer to Drudge. Greg Gutfeld was still writing there in mid-2008. Other conservatives or libertarians wrote there in that time too, but I don't remember who. My point is that HuffPo turned harder left about 10-11 years ago, as Adriana's politics turned harder left. It didn't moderate, just the opposite. If you take that as railing, that's on you.
As a "policy stance," for lack of a better term, I really don't care much about any media outlet's ideological or partisan bent. The important thing is to recognize all media sources and all individual journalists have a point of view.
Yeah you know more about their history than I do. I have never been to their website, just some of their columns come up in my feed and they are never ones negative about Democrats. I read some of the articles, some are awful.
Well each side plays to their respective base in the media. You might not agree with this, but Conservatives generally want to read more opinionated writing and liberals general want to read more factual based writing (I'm not meaning truth, as you can lie with facts, more meaning the writing style). Especially news sources like Vox, which is liberal but everything is written in a factual context. But you read daily caller and it's more from an emotional context.
That's why it's important to read both sides.
Who told you that?
No one. Just gathered that from reading each respective side. Read a Vox article then read a daily caller article on the same topic. Granted this is TV, but watch Rachel maddow then watch Tucker Carlson. Watch their style in how they present information.
I'm not saying conservative sites aren't factual. Just pay attention to the style on how the information is laid out.
Kunt logic, is there anything it can't do? Lets compare to things that aren't equal and draw some kind of conclusion from that comparison. Read Buzzfeed and then read a Heritage Foundation article on the same topic. Obviously the liberals aren't interested in facts.
Stupid, pathological liar and a Kunt. You're a hell of guy Hondo.
Well heritage foundation did invent Obamacare. So there's that.
Lie but one made out of stupidity and the fact that you're a liberal talking point parrot not malice. Hondo is more interested in fact!!!
The core of Obamacare came out of Heritage in the 90s and was supported by congressional republicans at the time, and then was implemented by Mitt Romney when he was the governor of Massachusetts. Maybe you should take a break for awhile, bob.
Sadly that's not the dumbest thing he did on this thread. Comparing BuzzFeed to heritage foundation isn't the dumbest thing either.
You claimed that liberals generally want more factual information and writing and that conservatives want more opinionated information and writing and when asked how you came to that conclusion you said:
No one. Just gathered that from reading each respective side. Read a Vox article then read a daily caller article on the same topic. Granted this is TV, but watch Rachel maddow then watch Tucker Carlson. Watch their style in how they present information.
Go fuck yourself Hondo. You came to your conclusion about Conservatives and Liberals and their desire for facts vs. opinion by watching fucking Maddow.
You claimed that liberals generally want more factual information and writing and that conservatives want more opinionated information and writing and when asked how you came to that conclusion you said:
No one. Just gathered that from reading each respective side. Read a Vox article then read a daily caller article on the same topic. Granted this is TV, but watch Rachel maddow then watch Tucker Carlson. Watch their style in how they present information.
Go fuck yourself Hondo. You came to your conclusion about Conservatives and Liberals and their desire for facts vs. opinion by watching fucking Maddow.
You are dumb and digging yourself deeper. Read all my comments on the issue.
I sincerely give credit to the HuffPo for writing that about a liberal. They usually seem to look the other way for those with the "D" next to their name.
Derek, do you think your news source does the same, just change the D to R....
This is why I rarely expend energy responding to you. The presupposition in your post is that I only have one news source. And you'd love for me to launch into a passionate defense of Fox News. Instead of responding to my actual point.
If you're not going to have a sincere discussion, then don't be surprised if I don't respond.
There is no presumption that you only have one news source. I'm being sincere that most news has gotten to a point where they only tell one side. Huff Po and MSNBC are the opposite of Fox news and daily caller.
I brought that up because you only point at the left as being one sided.
I personally troll Yahoo news because my feed shows just as much on the left as the right and I read through both sides on a topic.
Fox news is by no means balanced, but occasionally they also go against their side.
You claimed that liberals generally want more factual information and writing and that conservatives want more opinionated information and writing and when asked how you came to that conclusion you said:
No one. Just gathered that from reading each respective side. Read a Vox article then read a daily caller article on the same topic. Granted this is TV, but watch Rachel maddow then watch Tucker Carlson. Watch their style in how they present information.
Go fuck yourself Hondo. You came to your conclusion about Conservatives and Liberals and their desire for facts vs. opinion by watching fucking Maddow.
You are dumb and digging yourself deeper. Read all my comments on the issue.
Fuck you, that's your standard dodge whenever you stick your head up your ass. Amazing how nearly everyone here but your ass munching pal CD doesn't understand your genius Hondo.
Meanwhile Hondo the dipshit thinks Trump compared blacks to criminals because he mentioned CJR as something he'd done for blacks.
You claimed that liberals generally want more factual information and writing and that conservatives want more opinionated information and writing and when asked how you came to that conclusion you said:
No one. Just gathered that from reading each respective side. Read a Vox article then read a daily caller article on the same topic. Granted this is TV, but watch Rachel maddow then watch Tucker Carlson. Watch their style in how they present information.
Go fuck yourself Hondo. You came to your conclusion about Conservatives and Liberals and their desire for facts vs. opinion by watching fucking Maddow.
You are dumb and digging yourself deeper. Read all my comments on the issue.
Please link all of your comments. I’m seriously and genuinely interested in reading them.
I sincerely give credit to the HuffPo for writing that about a liberal. They usually seem to look the other way for those with the "D" next to their name.
Derek, do you think your news source does the same, just change the D to R....
This is why I rarely expend energy responding to you. The presupposition in your post is that I only have one news source. And you'd love for me to launch into a passionate defense of Fox News. Instead of responding to my actual point.
If you're not going to have a sincere discussion, then don't be surprised if I don't respond.
There is no presumption that you only have one news source. I'm being sincere that most news has gotten to a point where they only tell one side. Huff Po and MSNBC are the opposite of Fox news and daily caller.
I brought that up because you only point at the left as being one sided.
I personally troll Yahoo news because my feed shows just as much on the left as the right and I read through both sides on a topic.
Fox news is by no means balanced, but occasionally they also go against their side.
Yes and Shepherd Smith has said a few comments against Trump. It's funny the threats and comments they get when they do too. "Shep is not American for bashing Trump" and shit like that.
I sincerely give credit to the HuffPo for writing that about a liberal. They usually seem to look the other way for those with the "D" next to their name.
Derek, do you think your news source does the same, just change the D to R....
This is why I rarely expend energy responding to you. The presupposition in your post is that I only have one news source. And you'd love for me to launch into a passionate defense of Fox News. Instead of responding to my actual point.
If you're not going to have a sincere discussion, then don't be surprised if I don't respond.
There is no presumption that you only have one news source. I'm being sincere that most news has gotten to a point where they only tell one side. Huff Po and MSNBC are the opposite of Fox news and daily caller.
I brought that up because you only point at the left as being one sided.
I personally troll Yahoo news because my feed shows just as much on the left as the right and I read through both sides on a topic.
Fox news is by no means balanced, but occasionally they also go against their side.
Yes and Shepherd Smith has said a few comments against Trump. It's funny the threats and comments they get when they do too. "Shep is not American for bashing Trump" and shit like that.
What does this have to do with networks playing sides? It's almost like you're changing the argument in order to move the goalpost.
I sincerely give credit to the HuffPo for writing that about a liberal. They usually seem to look the other way for those with the "D" next to their name.
Derek, do you think your news source does the same, just change the D to R....
This is why I rarely expend energy responding to you. The presupposition in your post is that I only have one news source. And you'd love for me to launch into a passionate defense of Fox News. Instead of responding to my actual point.
If you're not going to have a sincere discussion, then don't be surprised if I don't respond.
There is no presumption that you only have one news source. I'm being sincere that most news has gotten to a point where they only tell one side. Huff Po and MSNBC are the opposite of Fox news and daily caller.
I brought that up because you only point at the left as being one sided.
I personally troll Yahoo news because my feed shows just as much on the left as the right and I read through both sides on a topic.
Fox news is by no means balanced, but occasionally they also go against their side.
Yes and Shepherd Smith has said a few comments against Trump. It's funny the threats and comments they get when they do too. "Shep is not American for bashing Trump" and shit like that.
What does this have to do with networks playing sides? It's almost like you're changing the argument in order to move the goalpost.
Comments
Lots of stupidity Bob.
No one. Just gathered that from reading each respective side. Read a Vox article then read a daily caller article on the same topic. Granted this is TV, but watch Rachel maddow then watch Tucker Carlson. Watch their style in how they present information.
Go fuck yourself Hondo. You came to your conclusion about Conservatives and Liberals and their desire for facts vs. opinion by watching fucking Maddow.
https://mashable.com/2017/06/08/fox-news-anchor-neil-cavuto-bashes-trump/#0pvhL3s2ZOqE
Meanwhile Hondo the dipshit thinks Trump compared blacks to criminals because he mentioned CJR as something he'd done for blacks.
Me neither
Fuck you’re horrible here. JFC.