Impeaching Trump: Make America Sane Again

[SeattleUte]

Agreed, but given the tight races in battleground states, even a little leakage among evangelicals could be a major hit to Trump's reelection chances. BTW, Trump's tweeted response to the editorial was predictable but still very funny:



I enjoy the obligatory rip on his target's ratings or dismal business prospects (e.g., "the failing New York Times" which continues to amass record profits), the "perfect transcript", calling any evangelical publication "far left", etc. And I'm sure the editor is crushed to learn Trump won't ever read his publication again--as if Trump ever reads it. Or anything else.

Pac, you're brilliant. I don't tell you that often enough.

CNN is every bit as bad as Fox. CNN learned from Fox.

[PaloAltoCougar]

Pac, you're brilliant. I don't tell you that often enough.

CNN is every bit as bad as Fox. CNN learned from Fox.

Ha! Once is more than often enough. And the first page of CNN's web page (which I confess I scan daily) is more predictably one-sided than Fox News.

And to return the compliment... I've been using your take on the Church Whistleblower issue to defend the Church on the matter. For your efforts, I envision you one day being dragged, kicking and screaming, past the pearly gates into the company of saved souls.

[Mr Bean]

Pac, you're brilliant. I don't tell you that often enough.

CNN is every bit as bad as Fox. CNN learned from Fox.

I'm not certain how you measure things things, but I would agree that by and large CNN is biased and not objective (though some anchors on CNN imo are very good, Jake Tapper being one). However, I don't think any channel can hold a candle to fox news for turd production and I don't think it's close. MSNBC might be a distant 2nd, CNN is not as bad as MSNBC and not nearly as bad as Fox.

You may not agree with CNN's politics, but in terms of fact based reporting they do a better job. I am sure there is some "objective" source out there that has a rolling lie-counter and I'm certain FOX is well out in front.

[SeattleUte]

Ha! Once is more than often enough. And the first page of CNN's web page (which I confess I scan daily) is more predictably one-sided than Fox News.

And to return the compliment... I've been using your take on the Church Whistleblower issue to defend the Church on the matter. For your efforts, I envision you one day being dragged, kicking and screaming, past the pearly gates into the company of saved souls.

It's dismaying to see how many exmos on facebook love Sanders. It's dismaying to see how many are saying "What would Jesus do with $100?" Jesus of Nazareth is not the same as Jesus of today.

As Harari explains, liberal humanism's belief in individualism, that individualism ultimately is what matters and individuls matter in equal degree whether billionaires or homeless, would be absurd without Christianity's central premise that humans are special animals with souls--whatever our faith or lack thereof. And we owe everything to liberal humanism. Capitalism itself is a part of it. (Harari ultimately is a scathing critic of liberal humanism, as he thinks pigs and horses matter as much as humans and we'd be better off as hunter gatherers. He did not undermine my liberal humanist faith.)

This is what so many who follow politics don't get today. Whatever your party affiliation, even Donald Trump, whatever your religion, if we're talking and respecting elections, if we defend speech rights, and not shooting at each other, we're likewise part of the liberal humanist cult. That's what really matters. So people need to take a chill pill.

[SeattleUte]

I'm not certain how you measure things things, but I would agree that by and large CNN is biased and not objective (though some anchors on CNN imo are very good, Jake Tapper being one). However, I don't think any channel can hold a candle to fox news for turd production and I don't think it's close. MSNBC might be a distant 2nd, CNN is not as bad as MSNBC and not nearly as bad as Fox.

You may not agree with CNN's politics, but in terms of fact based reporting they do a better job. I am sure there is some "objective" source out there that has a rolling lie-counter and I'm certain FOX is well out in front.

The only mainstream media outlet that still honors the old wall between news and opinion is The Wall Street Journal. I still spend most time in the New York Times, as I have my entire adult life. But the past few years I've had to pick through looking for real news. I still admire the Book section (not the podcast) and the arts. When I want to see opinion I look at the NYT or the WSJ editorial pages, or the New Yorker, New York Review of Books, etc. I just get offended when I see blatant opinion on the front pages.

I confess that I never listen to CNN or Fox but they're unavoidable on the Internet.

[tooblue]

The only mainstream media outlet that still honors the old wall between news and opinion is The Wall Street Journal. I still spend most time in the New York Times, as I have my entire adult life. But the past few years I've had to pick through looking for real news. I still admire the Book section (not the podcast) and the arts. When I want to see opinion I look at the NYT or the WSJ editorial pages, or the New Yorker, New York Review of Books, etc. I just get offended when I see blatant opinion on the front pages.

I confess that I never listen to CNN or Fox but they're unavoidable on the Internet.

Interactive Media Bias Chart 5.0:

https://www.adfontesmedia.com/intera...ia-bias-chart/

According the chart, the most reliable and unbiased source is the AP and Rueters ... with NPR, New York Times, ABC, BBC, Wall Street Journal, Politico, CNN.com (not the broadcast), Vox ect. in the quadrant as well. Interestingly, there are more media sources on the far right than on the left.

[SeattleUte]

Interactive Media Bias Chart 5.0:

https://www.adfontesmedia.com/intera...ia-bias-chart/

According the chart, the most reliable and unbiased source is the AP ... with NPR, New York Times, ABC, BBC, Wall Street Journal, Politico, parts of CNN, Vox ect. in the quadrant as well. Interestingly, there are more media sources on the far right than on the left.

NPR is NOT unbiased. That I do listen to.

I think one thing that happens is that reporters for mainstream media like NPR and the NYT all went to Ivy League schools or the like, they're all very smart, they spend a lot of time interacting and getting close to the rich and/or powerful--they are among the elites--but with few exceptions, they don't make that much money. All this power, all this prestige, and relatively little wealth. So they get resentful.

Also, outlets get a following, and they develop their medial to give that following what they want to hear or read. The WSJ had an interesting column a while back recalling how people used to question whether media was influenced by advertisers, but it may be that being influenced by readers--which is more where the money's at in social media as they bring advertisers--is more bias inducing than advertisers per se.

[tooblue]

NPR is NOT unbiased. That I do listen to.

I think one thing that happens is that reporters for mainstream media like NPR and the NYT all went to Ivy League schools or the like, they're all very smart, they spend a lot of time interacting and getting close to the rich and/or powerful--they are among the elites--but with few exceptions, they don't make that much money. All this power, all this prestige, and relatively little wealth. So they get resentful.

Also, outlets get a following, and they develop their medial to give that following what they want to hear or read. The WSJ had an interesting column a while back recalling how people used to question whether media was influenced by advertisers, but it may be that being influenced by readers--which is more where the money's at in social media as they bring advertisers--is more bias inducing than advertisers per se.

The motivation and methodology behind the interactive chart is sound:

[SeattleUte]

The motivation and methodology behind the interactive chart is sound:

Ad fontes media is left leaning.

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/all-g...-fontes-media/

Also, they are all biased, so this is meaningless. We're only talking about degrees of bias. At least the WSJ retains disciplined pure reporting on its front pages.

[Walter Sobchak]

I know there are some folks here who really really hate Trump and can't imagine why ANYONE would vote for someone as horrible and corrupt as he is. All I can say is that your bias blinders don't allow you to see what some of us have tried to explain over and over and over again.

As bad as Trump is, Bush was far worse in his respective 1st term and yet he was re-elected to a second. A second term of Trump is, relatively, not that big of a deal.

[tooblue]

Ad fontes media is left leaning.

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/all-g...-fontes-media/

Also, they are all biased, so this is meaningless. We're only talking about degrees of bias. At least the WSJ retains disciplined pure reporting on its front pages.

Every single person on the planet is biased; thus we are all meaningless? Of course not. No need to be that ridiculous about it.

I figured you to be more agnostic than nihilist? Guess I am wrong.

[SeattleUte]

Every single person on the planet is biased; thus we are all meaningless? Of course not. No need to be that ridiculous about it.

I figured you to be more agnostic than nihilist? Guess I am wrong.

There is nothing wrong with bias per se. Duh. I am not offended by the evident bias when Ben Shapiro or Nicholas Kristof speak or write, though I disagree with much of what they say for different reasons. That's not what I'm talking about here. I'm talking about the fraudulence of mainstream outlets that issue news stories as reportage that is infected by evident bias. NPR pretends that it has essentially no opinionated content. That's just BS. Most of what it broadcasts is strongly slanted.

[beefytee]

Pac, you're brilliant. I don't tell you that often enough.

CNN is every bit as bad as Fox. CNN learned from Fox.

Agreed, PAC is brilliant.

And agreed, Fox ruined CNN. I will never forgive them for it. CNN used to be great. Fox destroyed it.

[PaloAltoCougar]

Agreed, PAC is brilliant.

And agreed, Fox ruined CNN. I will never forgive them for it. CNN used to be great. Fox destroyed it.

Thanks for the compliment, though undeserved. Most important to me is the certainty that others have read that and resisted the temptation to mock or rebut, justified though they might have been. Christmas spirit reigns on CS. Happy holidays to all.

[Sleeping in EQ]

I read my Reuters app everyday.

Reuters keeps the BS to a minimum.