Every product of human cogitation is subjective, including the subjects that news media choose to cover, and how they cover them. What you should expect--demand--is fair and balanced coverage. Seldom achieved.
Normally I don’t watch CNN because I believe they are out to get trump. That goes for most of the major news networks except fox.
I found the Haitian population is family oriented. I been playing street soccer with them since i was 30 years old. My oldest son has played with me since he was 8 years old. I don’t do it anymore but I have done it 40 years.
I actually have learned a lot from them and they have learned things from me. I love those people I don’t think trump knows everything about them. He knows what the Republicans want him to know.
My opinion is about both parties are egually bad.
I am a conservative as well. When they first started coming here by boat we took them in people said they were all dope dealers not true.
I think we should leave these people alone. And not try an send them back.
I would not want to send the immigrants back either. I think immigration is a good thing in most cases. At the very least the immigrants are consumers and help the economy. I also think it's morally right to help.
My post was more about CNN editorializing while claiming to be journalists. The editorializing and bias is too blatant to pretend that they are what they claim to be.
You're out of your mind Oak. Fox is the most biased? Since Trump has been in office all the other stations promote all this far fetched rhetoric. Trump will be impeached bc he's mentally unstable, Russia colluding, he doesn't know what he's doing, he's unfit, colluding with Russia again... Hillary will beat trump by a landslide. Keep watching the other guys. Send all the liberals to California, put up a wall so they can never return, and let them run their own little world right down the toilet.
I get annoyed with fox because they are not biased enough in trumps favor.
I want to hear the trump lies. I could watch it on every other fucking channel.
I don’t want to watch trump hate on fox so they can say their fair and balanced.
Fuck fair and balanced are the other channels fair and balanced?
Since the left media wants to divide the country and cause another civil war. I hope before I go they get one. If there is I will be hunting so called journalist. Let’s see how they like that?
Since they hate guns and knives. They no doubt will hire people with guns to protect themselves. They better hire good ones that won’t run away with the shooting starts.
FoxNews is the most biased TV news outlet in the country, and there's not even a close second.
Harvard University's Shorenstein Center on Media, Politics and Public Policy has come out with a study of media coverage of the Trump White House in its first 100 days.
It is astonishing because it comes from Harvard, not exactly the bedrock of American conservatism.
The study found that in Trump's first 100 days in office, the tone of the news coverage of the president has been a whopping 80 percent negative to 20 percent positive.
CNN and NBC struck a 93 percent negative tone on their Trump stories, with only 7 percent positive. CBS was third in the anti-Trump race, with a 91 to 9 ratio. And the pro-Trump Fox News? That network was 52 percent negative to 48 percent positive.
To say FOX is biased is a complete falsehood. The three biased networks are CNN,NBC & CBS.
lol. You guys are calling CNN biased for reporting on all of the shady things surrounding Trump. What should they do, not report on it? This is more of the fascism coming from the Trump side. Silencing the media. Looks like we're already taking cues from Putin.
Just look at the history of FoxNews, its ownership. Roger Ailes, former CEO/pervert who dropped dead earlier this year admitted Fox was republican propaganda. He referred to Democrats as "The other side". Name one CNN or MSNBC shareholder/exec who actually referred to any political party as "the other side". I'll wait.
We're calling CNN biased for running false news stories with anonymous sources, sometimes only one, that aren't cross-checked and have no basis in fact or logic.
I could call CNN as an anonymous source and say that Donald Trump is a lizard who sustains himself by eating babies, it doesn't mean that they should report it.
The nonsense about Russian collusion and infiltration is just that - nonsense.
Remember the hell CNN gave Trump over Obama's birth-certificate? What they're doing now is just as embarrassing.
There have been employees flat out ADMITTING there is a directive from above to pursue false news stories about Trump.
It's 2017, where is the accountability for this shit?
FoxNews was founded, founded as a propaganda outlet for conservative politics. Their CEO referred to a political party as "the other side". You won't find a tv network with a nightly news program that ever had a shareholder or CEO with such a biased position.
I'm calling CNN biased because of pretty much everything I see on CNN. I typically read it only once a day. Maybe that's not enough to get the whole picture, but I would be surprised if I just happen to stumble across that same exact situation. When I see it on TV (very rarely now), it seems to almost always (probably 9 times out of 10) be a group of people criticizing Trump. I guess there is nothing else newsworthy.
In the example I gave originally, "America rescued her from Haiti. Now Trump wants to send her back.", the implication is that we, as a country, came together to rescue this girl, and now Trump wants to send her, specifically, back. This is the first I have ever heard of the girl, and I suspect its the first time that almost anybody, including Trump, has heard of her.
The headline is deliberately incendiary to get people angry at Trump. That's not objective journalism. That is a a clear example of bias.
You may have overlooked my original post where I said that Fox is biased too. I'm not defending Fox. Regarding executives or shareholders who referred to any political party as "the other side", I am not aware of any, but I think the headlines are sufficient evidence of bias.
I'm not saying CNN isn't biased. Isn't every news network in some form or another? It's the human condition. Your neighbor's kid gets drunk and drives into someone's house, lock the son of a bitch away. Your own kid does it, he just made a mistake and needs help. We all do this. What I'm saying is that there is no news network in America as biased as FoxNews. Not even close. They were founded as an outlet for right wing propaganda.
I'm not defending Fox. I don't even like Trump. I like some things that Trump has done, but I would not get along with him on a personal level, and I get along with pretty much everybody on a personal level.
I'm just tired of "news" organizations like CNN and NPR pretending to be objective while being blatantly biased. I hear NPR a lot when I'm driving. They are better at pretending than CNN, but they are still obvious. I think they know that for the most part they are preaching to the choir so they don't have to hide it, but they should at least try harder.
"Follow the leader" may be typical, but "typical" doesn't justify deliberately misleading people. I don't know when Fox said that they are a propaganda outlet (I'm not disputing it, but I've never seen it), but NPR and CNN have not, as far as I know, acknowledged that they are propaganda outlets. If they did, it would at least be a step in the right direction. From what I have seen, they pretend to be objective truth seekers, but emphasize the news that supports their agenda.
So don't watch it. I don't know what kind of life you lead Oak. When I come home in the morning, I either watch whatever local news station my wife has on or I turn on Fox. I get a quick glimpse of what's going on in the outside world and be on my way. No matter what I watch, it doesn't influence my life one bit. You see, when you're a grown up and have responsibilities the news is at the bottom of your priorities. If you're too busy worrying about everybody else, who's going to look out for you?
Fox deliberately misleads people. They lie 24/7. And, they're the cable news leader. Naturally, others will follow suit.
Your facts are wrong. You have people on FOX that are pro-Trump like Hannity, Ingram, Jeanine Pirro,Kimberly Guilfoyle , Carson and Jesse and more.. But you also have just as many if not more on Fox that are against Trump like Chris Wallace, Juan Williams, G.Rivera, John Roberts, Shepard Smith,the never Trump republicans like Perino, Stirewalt, Krauthammer, Carl Rove and more that also attack Trump. CNN talks negative about Trump from morning to night. Whenever a republican is invited on CNN to talk about positive things Trump does, you have five to six democrats and the host attacking and interrupting the republican. The fact that you have CNN staff and executives partying with Hillary when she stole the primaries from Bernie Sanders that says it all.
lol. Former Fox CEO/verified pervert/now dead Roger Ailes called the Democratic Party "The other side". Name one shareholder or executive at any other news network who refers to any political party as "the other side". I asked this earlier. Still waiting for an answer. Whatever complaint anyone could have about CNN, MSNBC, NPR, whatever, about having a bias, spinning, misleading, FoxNews is 10 times worse. They wrote the book on it.
Also worth noting that the Trump criticism is warranted. The Russia stuff is mind boggling. He's an open racist and misogynist. Mocked POWs and handicapped people right on television. Trump is a disgusting human being and he hasn't come close to accomplishing anything as president that would make up for it. He deserves nothing short of the national scorn he's getting. If it makes anyone angry, maybe they're the ones who should stop watching cable news. Because it's not going way. Trump is being treated exactly how he deserves to be treated.
lol. You guys are calling CNN biased for reporting on all of the shady things surrounding Trump. What should they do, not report on it? This is more of the fascism coming from the Trump side. Silencing the media. Looks like we're already taking cues from Putin.
Just look at the history of FoxNews, its ownership. Roger Ailes, former CEO/pervert who dropped dead earlier this year admitted Fox was republican propaganda. He referred to Democrats as "The other side". Name one CNN or MSNBC shareholder/exec who actually referred to any political party as "the other side". I'll wait.
Roger Ailes was a republican but if you recall Trump & Roger Ailes were feuding.Fox news had set a trap for Trump in the first debate. Roger Ailes was in bed with the never Trump republicans. You seem to forget, that Roger Ailes was backing Megan Kelly(a Trump hater).CNN/MSNBC went much further than referring to any political party as "the other side". They are in bed with the democrats and donate lots of money to the DNC. Once again you have your facts wrong.
I don't know why Fox was against Trump at first. Probably because he'd been a Democrat half his life, and there were conspiracy theories floating around that he was only running to sabotage the GOP and hand the election to Hillary, considering his history of being friends with the Clintons. Once Trump was the GOP nominee, FoxNews has been all in. They're a conservative propaganda network. They were founded as such. This isn't the case with any other cable news network. You look among the shareholders at the companies that own CNN, MSNBC, etc, you're probably going to find more conservatives than liberals. MSNBC's had people on like Joe Scarborough, Dennis Miller, Michael Savage. The punchable Jeffrey Lord is on CNN around the clock. Real liberal network, allowing that asshole to troll black America on a daily basis.
I don't know why Fox was against Trump at first. Probably because he'd been a Democrat half his life, and there were conspiracy theories floating around that he was only running to sabotage the GOP and hand the election to Hillary, considering his history of being friends with the Clintons. Once Trump was the GOP nominee, FoxNews has been all in. They're a conservative propaganda network. They were founded as such. This isn't the case with any other cable news network. You look among the shareholders at the companies that own CNN, MSNBC, etc, you're probably going to find more conservatives than liberals. MSNBC's had people on like Joe Scarborough, Dennis Miller, Michael Savage. The punchable Jeffrey Lord is on CNN around the clock. Real liberal network, allowing that asshole to troll black America on a daily basis.
You proved my point by making these baseless accusations.
I'm beginning to think that counseling Oak has been receiving following Hillary's defeat isn't enough. What does it matter if a news station is biased when the viewer is biased to begin with? From his posts, it is obvious that Oak as well as most libtArds will never admit when they're wrong. He still feels that Trump didn't win the eLection fair and square. The sad thing is that Trump wOuld've won regardless if he was dem or republican.
Also worth noting that the Trump criticism is warranted. The Russia stuff is mind boggling. He's an open racist and misogynist. Mocked POWs and handicapped people right on television. Trump is a disgusting human being and he hasn't come close to accomplishing anything as president that would make up for it. He deserves nothing short of the national scorn he's getting. If it makes anyone angry, maybe they're the ones who should stop watching cable news. Because it's not going way. Trump is being treated exactly how he deserves to be treated.
Here is a clip of Barack Obama mocking handicapped people on The Tonight Show.
All news media outlets have some or little bias in them, but not at the levels CNN, NBC, and Fox news. That is why I have more trust in BBC and The Wall Street Journal.
Lol Oak, back in the 90's Fox News was not designed that way, only after 9-11.
Oak, there were many in the Fox News that fought and attacked Trump from getting the nomination and failed.
For the record CNN is the most bias media news outlet there is. CNN colluded with Democrats to have Clinton win the primary, while Fox has never went to such extremes for any Republican in a primary, which I applaud them.
There is a documented history of FoxNews having shareholders and CEOs with a direct conservative agenda.
There is NO documented history of any other news network in the country having shareholders or CEOs with any direct political agenda. None. Zilch.
A news network CEO referring to a political party as "the other side", as Roger Ailes did, is evidence of propaganda. You're just not going to find evidence of any other network having leadership with this kind of agenda.
Ailes was with Fox from the start, which was in 1996. This network has served as conservative political propaganda from that very day, and continues to up to this very moment.
There is a documented history of FoxNews having shareholders and CEOs with a direct conservative agenda.
There is NO documented history of any other news network in the country having shareholders or CEOs with any direct political agenda. None. Zilch.
A news network CEO referring to a political party as "the other side", as Roger Ailes did, is evidence of propaganda. You're just not going to find evidence of any other network having leadership with this kind of agenda.
Ailes was with Fox from the start, which was in 1996. This network has served as conservative political propaganda from that very day, and continues to up to this very moment.
Hannity then took aim at Zucker and Lack’s campaign contributions “in case you’re still wondering what party affiliation these two ‘fake news chiefs’ belong to.” He mentioned that Zucker’s wife donated thousands of dollars to the DNC and Lack contributed over $50,000 to Democrats like President Obama, Hillary Clinton, Maxine Waters, and Barbara Boxer.
lol, Foots. What paychecks? Half of Trump's voters are unemployed and waiting for the coal jobs to come back, as he promised them.
Half of Trumps voters would be 30 million people, a small fraction of which are coal workers.
I can't blame you for not knowing this, as CNN perpetually ignores, degrades and mischaracterizes vast areas of 'flyover land'.
I like when people pretend soros and ted turner are just idle, non partisan observers. They literally direct the democratic party through their propaganda Cartels. Soros just dumped 18 billion into his think tank. Liberal media is ripping down the pillars of society one by one.
I actually like what Ben Carson said when he ran against trump for president. He thought ever adult voter should pay something in taxes and not nothing? Those oak and others agree with that?
lol, Foots. What paychecks? Half of Trump's voters are unemployed and waiting for the coal jobs to come back, as he promised them.
Half of Trumps voters would be 30 million people, a small fraction of which are coal workers.
I can't blame you for not knowing this, as CNN perpetually ignores, degrades and mischaracterizes vast areas of 'flyover land'.
I like when people pretend soros and ted turner are just idle, non partisan observers. They literally direct the democratic party through their propaganda Cartels. Soros just dumped 18 billion into his think tank. Liberal media is ripping down the pillars of society one by one.
I believe most, if not all, media outlets have some sort of bias, I'm not sure if there's a news station in the US that's truly non-partisan. I try to read different news angles to see how the different sides report on issues and see the story from all angles. That being said, Fox has always been the most biased news station and it's really not even close. CNN has its biases as well, especially since the recent election, but I feel like if you can't see the bias in one or either you're probably stuck in your own echo chamber, which is a problem I see more and more each day unfortunately. Nobody wants to understand the other side or even try, it's all extreme, blind partisanship and IMO that's disappointing since we're all supposed to be on the same side.
Has Fox News ever fabricated fictional stories about Obama or Clinton during their presidencies?
If so, then fair enough, but when you actually have CNN staffers admitting that they've been told to pursue fake stories about Trump to try and get him out of office...
I believe most, if not all, media outlets have some sort of bias, I'm not sure if there's a news station in the US that's truly non-partisan. I try to read different news angles to see how the different sides report on issues and see the story from all angles. That being said, Fox has always been the most biased news station and it's really not even close. CNN has its biases as well, especially since the recent election, but I feel like if you can't see the bias in one or either you're probably stuck in your own echo chamber, which is a problem I see more and more each day unfortunately. Nobody wants to understand the other side or even try, it's all extreme, blind partisanship and IMO that's disappointing since we're all supposed to be on the same side.
I agree that that all networks are biased to a certain degree. But to say that FOX is the most biased is completely false. In a previous thread I mentioned people on FOX that are pro-Trump,and many others that are negative to Trump. FOX does hire democrats such as Chris Wallace, Shepard Smith, Geraldo Rivera, Marie Harf,Jaun Williams and more. So I do not understand how you would make such a statement.
Has Fox News ever fabricated fictional stories about Obama or Clinton during their presidencies?
If so, then fair enough, but when you actually have CNN staffers admitting that they've been told to pursue fake stories about Trump to try and get him out of office...
Were you watching the station during those years? I know you're not American so I'm not trying to be rude when I say that, but this really isn't even a question. Like I said, they're all biased, but out of the major networks Fox News is the worst offender. CNN is getting worse since the election, but Fox has been at it forever. A quick Google will give you endless examples if you really want to see them.
Don't take this the wrong way either, because like I said something that has been exacerbated in the past couple years is once you tell someone something they don't agree with, they become unable to communicate with because they refuse to see anything from a different perspective. I believe this is due to the fact that you can spend all your time digesting only news you agree with and it's easy to get caught up in an echo chamber.
My wife does not watch much news it is cooking shows and days of our lives when that show is on at noon during the week.
I watch fox and cnn, msnbc for like a half hour total then fall a sleep.
If it does not make sense don’t believe it. How is Isis doing since trump became president. How is your 401k doing since trump became president?
How is the employment situation for blacks and Hispanics since trump has been elected?
I watch a ton of old movies on tcm and on Amazon. I don’t know why but I watch dirty dancing once a week. Nobody keeps baby in the corner.
Those are very good questions Footreads, unfortunately the leftist liberals will not find the answers on CNN,NBC and other leftist media they watch. They rather like to spent their time finding out how many scoops of ice cream, and diet coke Trump consumes.
Has Fox News ever fabricated fictional stories about Obama or Clinton during their presidencies?
If so, then fair enough, but when you actually have CNN staffers admitting that they've been told to pursue fake stories about Trump to try and get him out of office...
Let us not forget the debate questions that were given to Hillary and CNN staffers celebrating Hillary winning the primaries. Correction, I shouldn't have used the word "winning", the word "stealing" would be more appropriate.
FoxNews is the highest rated cable news network, and they are an admitted propaganda outlet. Can't blame the other networks for following the leader.
I think the others can definitely be blamed. Two wrongs don't make a right.
I used to rely on CNN (about 30 years ago), but now I am skeptical about pretty much everything they say about Trump. I don't know if they tell outright lies, but they seem to be more than happy to promote an anti-Trump agenda. During the election (I know this is anecdotal) CNN was running about 3 neutral or positive stories about Clinton and 3 negative stories about Trump per day. They could have at least done a better job pretending to be objective.
I first noticed the bias on NPR right after the election. There was a report about the New Orleans crime rate. The report started with something like this (quoted text is how I remember it, the gist is correct even if the words are not exact): "The New Orleans crime rate is increasing. Contrary to what Trump said, its not the worst that it has ever been, but it is getting worse." Adding "Contrary to what Trump said" added nothing to the story. It was just a contribution to the Democratic candidate for 2020.
I don't look at Fox news as an example of unbiased news. I used to watch it but I have not seen it regularly for years. In any case, an executive having a political bias does not mean that the whole organization is biased. If that is the standard, then the text messages sent by Peter Strzok should be enough to implicate the entire group and not just Strzok.
All news media outlets have some or little bias in them, but not at the levels CNN, NBC, and Fox news. That is why I have more trust in BBC and The Wall Street Journal.
BBC is my favorite. My commute is 3 hours each way. In the morning, about 1 1/2 hours of that is BBC and the rest is NPR. The BBC stories related to Trump are often negative, but for legitimate reasons. They aren't disguised campaigning like several of the other networks. Aside from that, they have some really good interviews (no holds barred). BBC is definitely different than the rest.
CNN press release: "CNN has terminated its relationship with Kathy Griffin after the comedian posed for a photograph while holding a fake, bloodied decapitated head meant to resemble the head of President Donald Trump."
The Atlantic: "the solar eclipse is racist" "https://www.dailywire.com/news/19956/atlantic-claims-mondays-solar-eclipse-racist-emily-zanotti
The article corrections were CNN's acknowledgement of mistake. They didn't acknowledge that the mistakes would have been avoided if basic fact checking had been done.
CNN (and correct me if I'm wrong, but I think a few other mainstream news organizations) couldn't be bothered to read the header of an email (it would have taken 30 seconds) to determine when it was sent. It takes less than a minute, but sometimes that is not necessary if it implicates a political opponent (my commentary of course, but I think its realistic). I bet (again, just my opinion, but its based on evidence) that if this email was attacking Obama, it would have been read carefully and rejected.
It only took a day or two to show that the whole story was not a story. In the meantime of course, the CNN pundits were just giddy over "proof" of collusion.
RollinBones, it's not a matter of media outlets having biases, it's a matter of a network CEO openly admitting to having a bias. This proves that the network they represent is propaganda. There is only one network that ever had such an executive or shareholder, and it's FoxNews.
RollinBones, it's not a matter of media outlets having biases, it's a matter of a network CEO openly admitting to having a bias. This proves that the network they represent is propaganda. There is only one network that ever had such an executive or shareholder, and it's FoxNews.
A CEO or executive having a political opinion is not so important. Expressing it publicly, if its going to influence the way the network reports, is definitely a cause for concern. Actions, such as CNN not doing even basic fact checking (dates that would take 30 seconds to verify) and deliberately inflammatory headlines, are more indicative of the credibility of the network.
One thing all of the networks agreed on in 2016 was that Donald J. Trump won the presidential election. 2017 has been a great year for this beloved country and 2018 will be even better.
Jeff Zucker: The Man who Turned CNN into the Clinton News Network
"CNN is owned by Time Warner Cable. Of course, Time Warner is one of Hillary Clinton’s top ten donors, having contributed over one million dollars to make sure she is the democratic nominee through direct donations to the campaign and donations to her Super PACs. As the first two primary results showed, Time Warner could not buy the election with donations alone. Instead, they used Zucker as a puppet to make sure Hillary stayed in the spotlight and Bernie was kept out. Well, Zucker, the ruse is up. We know what you are up to. You have made a mockery of the news, turning what was once the gold standard of news coverage into little more than a farce that any educated viewer can clearly see through. Zucker, you have allowed the powerhouse of cable television news to turn into the Clinton News Network, nothing more than a puppet for the elite."
Time Warner is a huge corporation, several shareholders. lol. Ailes was the CEO of FoxNews, and he made it clear that he considered the Democratic party to be "the other side". FoxNews was the only news network designed to be a political propaganda network. Those are the facts.
"The other side", FoxNews CEO Roger Ailes, of Democrats.
As Disney just bought Fox, your in for some hyper liberal relief.
You're not paying attention.
Rupert Murdoch still owns FoxNews. He sold off the entertainment assets, 21st century Fox, Hulu, etc, to Disney. He did this precisely so he could invest more into the news network, and even take control of local news stations across the country, to take advantage of new FCC rules.
Fox and every other news organization is biased. Evidence of the bias is not one guy's (even a CEO's) opinion. Actual reporting is more convincing.
Criticizing Fox has been trendy for at least 10 years now so I'm always skeptical of critics. A few years ago it was "understood" that Fox sued for the "right to lie". That claim was pushed for a long time until it was shown that it was not Fox news (it was an affiliate, could have been "The Simpsons"), and it was not suing for the "right to lie". People assume the worst about Fox. Its kind of a guilty until proven innocent thing, so I need to hear real proof before I believe it.
The problem with libtards is they can't move on. They must dwell and find scapegoats for their problems in life. When we were introduced to our new CEO at the hospital, I'll never forget what he said. There's problems everywhere you go. But if you come to me with a complaint or problem, you better have a solution. When Oak doesn't get laid, he blames his parents for not letting him lock his door when his boyfriend is over. Instead of moving out of his parents basement and getting his own place, he blames Trump and hard working American's (the deplorables) for his inability to make something of himself. And to say that anyone has it hard and are suppressed by white people and republicans is absurd. People come to this great country from all over the world to make something of themselves. I feel that it's safe to assume that not one of them come here and turn to the news to guide them in the correct path of success.
I agree that most people's problems are a consequence of their actions, at least in the U.S. and probably most other democracies. I'm dealing with a self-inflicted problem right now. Its my fault and that makes it worse, but it also means that I can avoid it in the future, and that's a good thing.
I'm guessing (just a guess) that people blame their problems on others. I have not seen OakAsFan blame any problems on anybody else. In my opinion, he's wrong, but he's not assigning blame. I'm 100% convinced that I'm right about this, and I don't consciously have any dogs in the race, so I'm very comfortable with my arguments.
On a related note, has anybody been listening to Ben Shapiro? I first heard of him a few weeks ago and I'm very impressed.
Time Warner is a huge corporation, several shareholders. lol. Ailes was the CEO of FoxNews, and he made it clear that he considered the Democratic party to be "the other side". FoxNews was the only news network designed to be a political propaganda network. Those are the facts.
Time Warner being a huge corporation that donates a lot of money to the DNC bolsters our arguement that CNN is a puppet of the democratic party. If Ailes considers the Democrat party as "the other side" then why did he also hire democrats on FOX news like Megan Kelly, Juan Williams, Alan Comes, Geraldo Rivera, Sheppard Smith, Chris Wallace, John Roberts and more. Your facts are wrong once again. And even if Ailes did say that, he is allowed to voice his political views as long as the company that he runs is fair and balanced. Like hiring people from both sides of the political spectrum. Unlike fake news CNN.They put one republican on and then gang up on him or her.
FoxNews was designed to attack progressive politics. To discredit them, to isolate it's outspoken supporters, and to intimidate others from sharing such views. None of the other networks were designed this way They're all subsidiaries of entertainment corporations. Murdoch just dumped off his entertainment assets to shore up the war chest for his political propaganda. With Republicans in control of government, FoxNews is essentially state television. Like North Korea.
FoxNews was designed to attack progressive politics. To discredit them, to isolate it's outspoken supporters, and to intimidate others from sharing such views. None of the other networks were designed this way They're all subsidiaries of entertainment corporations. Murdoch just dumped off his entertainment assets to shore up the war chest for his political propaganda. With Republicans in control of government, FoxNews is essentially state television. Like North Korea.
"The other side".... Maybe Roger Ailes was on to something: - When you see the previous administration give away 20% of its uranium to Russia -allowed ISIS to establish a caliphate. -Give money to the the Iranian mullahs so that they can continue terror in the middle east. -giving ammunition to the Mexican cartels - spy on the opposition party
These are only but a few examples of "the other side's" behavior.
As opposed to what...? The inclusiveness of liberals?
Maybe we just want to be able to use the bathroom without a man dressed as woman walking into the bathroom. Maybe I don't want my wife to be in a bathroom when a man dressed as a woman walks in.
Maybe the fact that we are even debating this complete and utter insanity has had an effect on conservatives and separated us into two groups. If that's your world, you are the other side.
Most public restrooms are switching to private, single person use, anyway, which is long overdue. Why do we need mens rooms and womens rooms? It's not the 1950s. Do you need to hang out with the guys from Grease and talk about your cars while peeing? Is this what conservatives want?
We need mens rooms because men piss standing up and urine goes all over the place. Women sit on those toilets. Cnn and msnbc are trash and fake news. Fox, although far from perfect , is a voice for conservative values.
Most public restrooms are switching to private, single person use, which is long overdue.
Environmental stewardship and ocean conservation is long overdue. Sitting around talking about where I piss isn't.
Recognition of our deteriorating labor unions is long overdue. Sitting around talking about where I piss isn't.
Attention to skyrocketing autism rates on Long Island is long overdue (especially among male newborns). Sitting around talking about where I piss isn't.
Discussion on drug addiction and alcoholism is long overdue. Sitting around talking about where I piss isn't.
This is my favorite feminist quote. Reimagining the 1950's as a female dystopia. Yet ignoring the fact that if we hadn't succeeded in the 1940's, no American woman would currently exist.
(My second favorite feminist quote is "barefoot and pregnant". I think about it every time I see a pregnant woman at the mall with a bag full of high end items, notably shoes)
Ever see a play on Broadway the women’s line is much longer then the men’s line because women take a long time to do everything. Unlike men who piss standing up. Then we go to the bar in the Theather and have a few while we wait for the women to leave the ladies room. Then return to our seats just before intermission ends.
We need mens rooms because men piss standing up and urine goes all over the place. Women sit on those toilets. Cnn and msnbc are trash and fake news. Fox, although far from perfect , is a voice for conservative values.
So, when you pee in your toilet at home, it goes all over the place? Ever considered getting your prostate checked? Or, didn't your mom teach you during potty training that your aim is better when you hold your wee wee? Or, do you just pee intentionally with your arms to your side, like you're the king of your own little bathroom universe? I can imagine what your place smells like.
This is my favorite feminist quote. Reimagining the 1950's as a female dystopia. Yet ignoring the fact that if we hadn't succeeded in the 1940's, no American woman would currently exist.
(My second favorite feminist quote is "barefoot and pregnant". I think about it every time I see a pregnant woman at the mall with a bag full of high end items, notably shoes)
I just said 1950s because I thought of people talking in bathrooms in movies like Grease, like this was once a thing to do. Why else would anyone want "mens rooms" and "womens rooms"? To watch other people go? Maybe we can leave this to the states. Let the advanced states on the coasts build individual use public restrooms, and let the midwest and southern states keep their men and womens rooms, complete with full length mirrors in the ladies' room and a long urinal in the men's room, so the good old boys can "bond" (or whatever else they do in there). Problem solved.
My hospital in FL along with many stores have what you're describing Oak. I have to agree with you. I don't know how many times I've had to wait for a single men's toilet and knock on the women's and if nobody is in there I relieve myself. I make sure I put the seat down.
The space used to create the old fashion mens and womens rooms could create enough single use restrooms to serve public traffic with the right planning. Beaches have been doing this for years. Venice Beach is a zoo on weekends yet those single use restrooms work fine. They have long buildings with entire rows of them on each side.
The space used to create the old fashion mens and womens rooms could create enough single use restrooms to serve public traffic with the right planning. Beaches have been doing this for years. Venice Beach is a zoo on weekends yet those single use restrooms work fine. They have long buildings with entire rows of them on each side.
Citing examples of sexual misconduct on trains, an author recently floated the idea of gender segregated subway cars in NYC. As if sexual assault were an epidemic, which it isn't, the author uses stats from 2017. Here are some other gender related statistics for the modern era:
Overdose deaths in NY State, 2017: Male - 1574 Female - 592 https://www.kff.org/other/state-indicator/opioid-overdose-deaths-by-gender/?currentTimeframe=0&sortModel=%7B%22colId%22:%22Location%22,%22sort%22:%22asc%22%7D
Did you see trump negotiate with republican and democrats on immigration reform yesterday.
It seemed confusing but it wasn’t. First he knows democrats hate him. Also republicans believe since they got trump in their pocket they can hard bargain democrats.
So what does trump do he says he will stay out of the negotiations and will sign any bill both sides can agree on.
But he also said they need the wall and a stop to relative immigration.
Democrats asked for a clean bill for doca now and later will hammer out the details. They assumed he would say no to that and shut down the government then they can blame trump and the republicans now they can’t say that.
Trump will let the doca people stay here now he said that during the campaign if they are not criminals they can stay.
So the democrats can’t use it against trump in 2020.
But if the wall is not given the okay before the 2018 election republican will hold both houses. Because the democrats will be seen as total obstructionists and liars.
Republican will get more money for defense and have the high ground.
Over all trump really understands how to get what he wants eventually without all the hate.
The space used to create the old fashion mens and womens rooms could create enough single use restrooms to serve public traffic with the right planning. Beaches have been doing this for years. Venice Beach is a zoo on weekends yet those single use restrooms work fine. They have long buildings with entire rows of them on each side.
I am seeing this in NYC Resturants as well.
Walk downstairs and right into a an open long area of doors to the left and wash up for all on right. Works perfectly, it seamed a bit strange to me at first but made perfect cense and not a problem for anyone.
