You are here: Home > Message Board > News & Politics > Bias against Trump
June 15 2019 11.41pm

Bias against Trump

Previous Topic | Next Topic


Page 299 of 304 < 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 >

 

View ChrisGC's Profile ChrisGC Flag Wantage 11 Jun 19 12.27pm Send a Private Message to ChrisGC Add ChrisGC as a friend

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

Now now!

Everyone knows that "The Sky at Night" was hosted by the late Sir Patrick Moore who was clearly white.

Which is about as relevant as anything you have contributed.

Nothing is irrelevant, remember?

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View dollardays's Profile dollardays Flag 11 Jun 19 12.39pm Send a Private Message to dollardays Add dollardays as a friend

Life has many seasons to it. Like all Presidents before him Trump will of course eventually be a distant memory so there's little point huffing and puffing too much about it all.

With Dubya it was a war footing with a 'Hearts and Minds' veneer, Obama promised 'Hope and Change' that never arrived. We're now firmly in the 'Tits & Ass' Presidency. When all's said and done, the good times may well turn into that strip club visit where your wallet went missing, but that's politics for you. 'The more things change, the more they stay the same', and all that. What the next presidency will be summed up by I wonder?

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View W12's Profile W12 Flag 11 Jun 19 12.46pm Send a Private Message to W12 Add W12 as a friend

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle


If an act is voluntary then there is no suppression.


You are clearly confused between oppression and suppression.

To oppress means to keep (someone) down by unjust force or authority. To repress is (1) to hold back, or (2) to put down by force. Suppress, which is broader and more common than the other two, means (1) to put an end to, (2) to inhibit, and (3) to keep from being revealed.

In the case being discussed the details were suppressed by multiple institutions and organisations due to either fear of consequences or political ideology. Being a coward (in the former example) or subscribing to a set of believes (in the latter), are both choices (voluntary) but clearly involved suppression.

Leftist arguments never stand up to scrutiny.

Edited by W12 (11 Jun 2019 12.48pm)

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Wisbech Eagle's Profile Wisbech Eagle Flag Truro Cornwall 11 Jun 19 1.07pm Send a Private Message to Wisbech Eagle Add Wisbech Eagle as a friend

Originally posted by Teddy Eagle

So your contention is that every media outlet decided voluntarily and simultaneously that there was nothing newsworthy in the various stories?

That's really sad!

After I carefully explain why what you say isn't true you still seem incapable of understanding it. I even highlighted the important words.

It cannot surely be that difficult to understand.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Wisbech Eagle's Profile Wisbech Eagle Flag Truro Cornwall 11 Jun 19 1.18pm Send a Private Message to Wisbech Eagle Add Wisbech Eagle as a friend

Originally posted by W12

You are clearly confused between oppression and suppression.

To oppress means to keep (someone) down by unjust force or authority. To repress is (1) to hold back, or (2) to put down by force. Suppress, which is broader and more common than the other two, means (1) to put an end to, (2) to inhibit, and (3) to keep from being revealed.

In the case being discussed the details were suppressed by multiple institutions and organisations due to either fear of consequences or political ideology. Being a coward (in the former example) or subscribing to a set of believes (in the latter), are both choices (voluntary) but clearly involved suppression.

Leftist arguments never stand up to scrutiny.

Edited by W12 (11 Jun 2019 12.48pm)


I am neither leftish nor the least bit confused.

Nothing whatsover that you write has any connection to the point I made. Nothing!

So it seems that you are the one who is confused.

To repeat for the umpteenth time I have no idea if the media "suppressed information" or were "oppressed" or any other epithet you wish to use. Nor have I expressed any opinion on it's desirability, or not, if they were in these exchanges because it's NOT the issue. The issue is only whether, should that have happened, press freedom would have been impinged and NOTHING else.

Why it takes so many posts for such a simple point to be understood beats me, but that's not my fault. I could hardly have been clearer.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Teddy Eagle's Profile Teddy Eagle Flag 11 Jun 19 1.22pm Send a Private Message to Teddy Eagle Add Teddy Eagle as a friend

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

That's really sad!

After I carefully explain why what you say isn't true you still seem incapable of understanding it. I even highlighted the important words.

It cannot surely be that difficult to understand.

I’m obviously intellectually challenged, that’s a given but am still waiting for a reason for this story not being reported. All you’re saying is “They didn’t want to”.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View W12's Profile W12 Flag 11 Jun 19 1.22pm Send a Private Message to W12 Add W12 as a friend

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle


I am neither leftish nor the least bit confused.

Nothing whatsover that you write has any connection to the point I made. Nothing!

So it seems that you are the one who is confused.

To repeat for the umpteenth time I have no idea if the media "suppressed information" or were "oppressed" or any other epithet you wish to use. Nor have I expressed any opinion on it's desirability, or not, if they were in these exchanges because it's NOT the issue. The issue is only whether, should that have happened, press freedom would have been impinged and NOTHING else.

Why it takes so many posts for such a simple point to be understood beats me, but that's not my fault. I could hardly have been clearer.

OK then yes, the press have complete freedom to suppress information.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Wisbech Eagle's Profile Wisbech Eagle Flag Truro Cornwall 11 Jun 19 2.00pm Send a Private Message to Wisbech Eagle Add Wisbech Eagle as a friend

Originally posted by Teddy Eagle

I’m obviously intellectually challenged, that’s a given but am still waiting for a reason for this story not being reported. All you’re saying is “They didn’t want to”.

Then you will have to wait because I have no intention of getting drawn into that subject.

By the way, I am not saying “They didn’t want to”. I am not saying anything at all.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Wisbech Eagle's Profile Wisbech Eagle Flag Truro Cornwall 11 Jun 19 2.03pm Send a Private Message to Wisbech Eagle Add Wisbech Eagle as a friend

Originally posted by W12

OK then yes, the press have complete freedom to suppress information.

Unless you want state control over the press then yes.

That's what freedom means. To publish, or not publish being their decision alone.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Teddy Eagle's Profile Teddy Eagle Flag 11 Jun 19 2.17pm Send a Private Message to Teddy Eagle Add Teddy Eagle as a friend

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

Then you will have to wait because I have no intention of getting drawn into that subject.

By the way, I am not saying “They didn’t want to”. I am not saying anything at all.

Well, that was worth waiting for.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View W12's Profile W12 Flag 11 Jun 19 2.36pm Send a Private Message to W12 Add W12 as a friend

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle


Unless you want state control over the press then yes.

That's what freedom means. To publish, or not publish being their decision alone.

That used to work when the press themselves were more representative of the people they are supposed to represent (and when the country was more homogeneous). Now the BBC, Sky, Channel 4, ITV news (all the major broadcasters) follow the same political ideals (otherwise you couldn't get a job in the first place) and follow the same script (even in fictional shows).

i.e.

Orange man bad (and racist, sexist, etc)
All Migration good (and saying otherwise is racist)
Minorities cannot be criticized (that's racist)
Do not promote traditional family values (that's homophobic, transphobic, sexist etc)
Call the working class "right wing" to shut them up (they are all racists anyway)
Ignore actual crime figures (because if you look too close you might find conclusions you don't like)
Ignore terrorism (it's our fault anyway and you also might find conclusions you don't like)

[all the above in short form soundbite format]

Now they are moving on to sexualizing children and promoting racism against white people (even on the BBC, so we are paying for it). What's next I wonder?

In short the mainstream media operates for the left wing middle classes and minorities in the population. People who are still young enough are finding better alternatives online (typically long form and far more intelligent and diverse debate) and the mainstream media is in it's death throws.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View W12's Profile W12 Flag 11 Jun 19 3.46pm Send a Private Message to W12 Add W12 as a friend

[Link]

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply

 

Page 299 of 304 < 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 >

Previous Topic | Next Topic

You are here: Home > Message Board > News & Politics > Bias against Trump