Since I don't care to waste my time in non-productive debates, I find myself mostly relegated to fact-checking opinions offered as fact and other misstatements.
While I do find that satisfying, I'd prefer to spend more time just enjoying the cartoons and non-political threads. Please think more about what you are saying, and remember that I'll be looking over your shoulder. (Don worry, mcfarm, I don't read your drivel.)
Yes, this goes along with my trying to see this as - get the popcorn . . .
I don't mind being fact-checked - as long as it isn't snopes or some other liberal leaning site. If I'm wrong, I do want to know.
If facts are facts and not opinions, the source doesn't matter.
Oh, it does matter. Rarely, when it comes to politics, do we really know what the facts are.
Viewers of Rachael Maddow know that anything Sean Hannity says is twisted. Viewers of Sean Hannity know that anything Rachael Maddow says is twisted.
What was the last study? 92% of MSM coverage of Donald Trump was negative? Is it possible that Trump's performance in office has really been that bad? Things seem to be going pretty fair - economy is booming, looks like a deal with Canada and Mexico, NK isn't firing any missiles over Japan now - but 92%?
There are no Walter Cronkites or Eric Severeids today.
"Oh, it does matter. Rarely, when it comes to politics, do we really know what the facts are."
You prove my point. You are confusing fact with opinion.
"Oh, it does matter. Rarely, when it comes to politics, do we really know what the facts are."
You prove my point. You are confusing fact with opinion.
This is getting somewhat ridiculous.
Two people with opposite views on what is happening in Washington today will never agree on "the facts." How do you "check the facts"? Snopes? No, that is a Left leaning site. Google? Hardly. Fox News?? (g)
So, according to you, no discussion is possible. If that is the way you really feel, what are you doing here in the NTR section?
Not that I want you to leave this section, Carl. You're the one sane voice on your side we have!
The best we can do is to listen to both Rachael and Sean and then try to decide what the "facts" are. And, of course, that is problematic. But, if we want to have an idea about what is going on, we need to try to connect the dots, since about everything we hear is advocating one side or the other.
If someone still doesn't know the difference between an opinion and a fact, then no discussion is meaningful. I'll
leave this thread now, since my work here is done. All yours.
If someone still doesn't know the difference between an opinion and a fact, then no discussion is meaningful.
And, if you don't realize that some of your "facts" can be simply not true - or just be opinions - well, then I agree with you about discussions.
Over the years, I have come to realize that some of what I have thought were facts - things that I was sure I was correct about - have proven to be wrong. We always have incomplete - or even plain wrong - information.
and carl was "the one lone voice"I think he did what libs do right in this short thread except scream "you are a racist" on the way out
Jaguar, I accept your post.
Jaguar,
You've been doing good.
Don't start targeting specific posters using grammar or spelling errors they made in your response to make fun of them.
Was this what you were looking for, mike?
