Page 1 of 21 1234511 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 404

Thread: Cable News

  1. #1
    We're talking CNN, aka the Clinton News Network, MSNBC, aka MSDNC (Microsoft Democratic National Committee) and Fox News Channel aka Faux News Channel. Which one do you watch? I mostly watch FNC but watch all three if a big story like coronavirus or protests/looting/riots are going on. Most people watch according to their political persuasion, liberals watch CNN, MSNBC and conservatives watch FNC, however it's estimated that a third of FNC's audience are liberals.

    In the forums when someone makes a quote of anyone of these news sources it can be met with "That's your source? They have no credibility." It doesn't matter if the story is true of not it's whether the story fits the liberal or conservative narrative.

    Redietz, and others here, make fun of FNC views and viewers. The views are old, white, and low IQ, according to them. The arrogance from the left is stunning. However, conservatives do make fun of CNN and MSNBC.

    Here's the difference. On CNN and MSNBC you get liberal opinion. On FNC you get BOTH LIBERAL AND CONSERVATIVE OPINION. That's the difference between these three news sources. FNC by far has more balance between liberal and conservative opinion than the other two.
    "More importantly, mickey thought 8-4 was two games over .500. Argued about it. C'mon, man. Nothing can top that for math expertise. If GWAE ever has you on again, you can be sure I'll be calling in with that gem.'Nuff said." REDIETZ

  2. #2
    Just scan the Google news headlines like a civilized person.

  3. #3
    Originally Posted by smurgerburger View Post
    Just scan the Google news headlines like a civilized person.
    This is Barney

    The google, the Yahoo's, and any other computer news service is heavily biased toward the left...

  4. #4
    Originally Posted by Barney View Post
    Originally Posted by smurgerburger View Post
    Just scan the Google news headlines like a civilized person.
    This is Barney

    The google, the Yahoo's, and any other computer news service is heavily biased toward the left...
    Does it matter though? It seems to me how different factions are interpreting things is itself news, and in a way more knowable than whatever the underlying subject matter may be.

  5. #5
    If you want see how credible the news is, just try and find information on George Floyd’s criminal history, the drugs in him and his health issues at time of death.

    Yes, the man was still murdered but a truthful media would be reporting these things as well. Unfortunately they gave in years ago to Political Correctness and are fearful of having a honest discussion of how some people end up in situations with police.

    But again it’s a media that leads with emotion, not facts.

  6. #6
    Originally Posted by smurgerburger View Post
    Just scan the Google news headlines like a civilized person.
    Thats great if you want your news with a liberal slant.
    "More importantly, mickey thought 8-4 was two games over .500. Argued about it. C'mon, man. Nothing can top that for math expertise. If GWAE ever has you on again, you can be sure I'll be calling in with that gem.'Nuff said." REDIETZ

  7. #7
    Originally Posted by mickeycrimm View Post
    Originally Posted by smurgerburger View Post
    Just scan the Google news headlines like a civilized person.
    Thats great if you want your news with a liberal slant.
    What slant would you prefer it with?

  8. #8
    I like to watch a little bit of everything and its funny how they all approach the same story differently and selectively edit quotes
    and videos to fit their narratives.

    Reminds me of saying I once heard. Their are 3 sides to every story: The liberal side, the conservative side, and the truth.

  9. #9
    FNC giving Floyd's criminal past is just a bit of victim shaming that's why.

    The conservative slant is this was a miscarriage of Justice, police brutality, everyone agrees Derek Chauvin should not have held his knee for 8 minutes over Floyd's neck BUT... oh Floyd was a criminal anyway.

    It's the equivalent of exposing rape victims former sexual history.

    It's designed to come up with an excuse for the unexcusable. The video is so compelling that no one wants to get caught saying Floyd was not mistreated so yeah but he had a past.

    How relevant is his past to this case. Almost certainly any mention will be deemed inadmissible during Chauvin court trial.

  10. #10
    Originally Posted by Darkoz View Post
    FNC giving Floyd's criminal past is just a bit of victim shaming that's why.

    The conservative slant is this was a miscarriage of Justice, police brutality, everyone agrees Derek Chauvin should not have held his knee for 8 minutes over Floyd's neck BUT... oh Floyd was a criminal anyway.

    It's the equivalent of exposing rape victims former sexual history.

    It's designed to come up with an excuse for the unexcusable. The video is so compelling that no one wants to get caught saying Floyd was not mistreated so yeah but he had a past.

    How relevant is his past to this case. Almost certainly any mention will be deemed inadmissible during Chauvin court trial.
    His criminal past will be, but his health and the drugs in his system will not be. The defense will present experts who will say they contributed to his death. Still Derek should and hopefully will be convicted and never see a free day again. I don’t think many disagree with that.

  11. #11
    Originally Posted by The Boz View Post
    Originally Posted by Darkoz View Post
    FNC giving Floyd's criminal past is just a bit of victim shaming that's why.

    The conservative slant is this was a miscarriage of Justice, police brutality, everyone agrees Derek Chauvin should not have held his knee for 8 minutes over Floyd's neck BUT... oh Floyd was a criminal anyway.

    It's the equivalent of exposing rape victims former sexual history.

    It's designed to come up with an excuse for the unexcusable. The video is so compelling that no one wants to get caught saying Floyd was not mistreated so yeah but he had a past.

    How relevant is his past to this case. Almost certainly any mention will be deemed inadmissible during Chauvin court trial.
    His criminal past will be, but his health and the drugs in his system will not be. The defense will present experts who will say they contributed to his death. Still Derek should and hopefully will be convicted and never see a free day again. I don’t think many disagree with that.
    Yes, totally in agreement

  12. #12
    Originally Posted by smurgerburger View Post
    Originally Posted by mickeycrimm View Post
    Originally Posted by smurgerburger View Post
    Just scan the Google news headlines like a civilized person.
    Thats great if you want your news with a liberal slant.
    What slant would you prefer it with?
    I prefer to listen to both sides of issues. That's why I mostly watch Fox News.
    "More importantly, mickey thought 8-4 was two games over .500. Argued about it. C'mon, man. Nothing can top that for math expertise. If GWAE ever has you on again, you can be sure I'll be calling in with that gem.'Nuff said." REDIETZ

  13. #13
    Originally Posted by The Boz View Post
    If you want see how credible the news is, just try and find information on George Floyd’s criminal history, the drugs in him and his health issues at time of death.

    Yes, the man was still murdered but a truthful media would be reporting these things as well. Unfortunately they gave in years ago to Political Correctness and are fearful of having a honest discussion of how some people end up in situations with police.

    But again it’s a media that leads with emotion, not facts.
    The Boz put up a great post above and brings up a good lead into what could be a very informative discussion regarding Political Correctness and the media's fear of having an honest discussion of how some people end up in situations with police.

    That fear by the media to omit writing about Political Correctness truthfully is one of the primary reasons that gives police departments not only the bad reputations but also helps put all officers in excessive danger throughout their careers. Why do blacks by large majorities always seem to have bad relationships with police departments across the country compared to almost all other ethnicities? There is no great mystery here that anyone including the media does not already know where it began. Black children in large numbers grow up in single-family households with the mother as the parent. At a very young age, the children often become completely undisciplined which sets the example for their entire lives. The little that they did learn from their parent is that they are all victims.

    Often resulting in bad attitudes beyond belief. A complete lack of understanding of how to deal or react with an authority figure in any profession.

    State Governments can defund all the law enforcement agencies they want, but Political Correctness fear by the press is going to be the real downfall of the country.

  14. #14
    Originally Posted by Darkoz View Post
    FNC giving Floyd's criminal past is just a bit of victim shaming that's why.

    The conservative slant is this was a miscarriage of Justice, police brutality, everyone agrees Derek Chauvin should not have held his knee for 8 minutes over Floyd's neck BUT... oh Floyd was a criminal anyway.

    It's the equivalent of exposing rape victims former sexual history.

    It's designed to come up with an excuse for the unexcusable. The video is so compelling that no one wants to get caught saying Floyd was not mistreated so yeah but he had a past.

    How relevant is his past to this case. Almost certainly any mention will be deemed inadmissible during Chauvin court trial.
    I've had a problem with trigger happy cops for decades. To many of them have gone scott free by prosecutor's failing to charge. I have a problem with police unions protecting bad cops. I don't think a cop has to make a kill shot when a suspect with a knife is not within striking distance. I'm for reforms in these areas but not for defunding police departments.

    A white cop killing an unarmed black man is a rare event. Happened only 9 times last year. But about 7000 blacks were killed by other blacks last year. Where is the outrage, the protests? Do you understand the magnitude of difference in cops killing blacks vs. blacks killing blacks? It seems "Black Lives Matter," when one is killed by a cop, but "Black Lives Don't Matter" when blacks kill blacks. This is the stinging hypocrisy of the left.

    The hard left don't care how many blacks kill blacks. They only care to scare blacks into voting democrat.
    "More importantly, mickey thought 8-4 was two games over .500. Argued about it. C'mon, man. Nothing can top that for math expertise. If GWAE ever has you on again, you can be sure I'll be calling in with that gem.'Nuff said." REDIETZ

  15. #15
    We need the death penalty for BOTH cops and politicians that commit these egregious crimes!

  16. #16
    Speaking of cable news, I’m sitting in an airport stuck with CNN. They truly are 24/7 anti Trump. He was just called a racist by the anchor. Certainly not a news channel, really no different than the HP or Breitbart as an opinion site.

    Also they are doing a story on Unions protecting “bad” cops. Duh, it’s what unions do. They never have an issue when Unions defend bad teachers who don’t do their job properly. I wonder overall which group has done more damage to Americans over time, the police or public school teachers? Take emotion out of it and look at it objectively and the answer isn’t an easy one.

  17. #17
    Originally Posted by jbjb View Post
    We need the death penalty for BOTH cops and politicians that commit these egregious crimes!
    Good luck with that as there are 22 states that don't have the death penalty and 3 more that have a governor's moratorium. Twenty of those would be considered deep blue states, including Minnesota.

  18. #18
    Originally Posted by The Boz View Post
    Speaking of cable news, I’m sitting in an airport stuck with CNN. They truly are 24/7 anti Trump. He was just called a racist by the anchor. Certainly not a news channel, really no different than the HP or Breitbart as an opinion site.
    True dat!

    I was just remarking on this the other night.
    Some of us see it plain as day.
    Others I guess, consume and enjoy it.

  19. #19
    Originally Posted by mickeycrimm View Post
    Originally Posted by Darkoz View Post
    FNC giving Floyd's criminal past is just a bit of victim shaming that's why.

    The conservative slant is this was a miscarriage of Justice, police brutality, everyone agrees Derek Chauvin should not have held his knee for 8 minutes over Floyd's neck BUT... oh Floyd was a criminal anyway.

    It's the equivalent of exposing rape victims former sexual history.

    It's designed to come up with an excuse for the unexcusable. The video is so compelling that no one wants to get caught saying Floyd was not mistreated so yeah but he had a past.

    How relevant is his past to this case. Almost certainly any mention will be deemed inadmissible during Chauvin court trial.
    I've had a problem with trigger happy cops for decades. To many of them have gone scott free by prosecutor's failing to charge. I have a problem with police unions protecting bad cops. I don't think a cop has to make a kill shot when a suspect with a knife is not within striking distance. I'm for reforms in these areas but not for defunding police departments.

    A white cop killing an unarmed black man is a rare event. Happened only 9 times last year. But about 7000 blacks were killed by other blacks last year. Where is the outrage, the protests? Do you understand the magnitude of difference in cops killing blacks vs. blacks killing blacks? It seems "Black Lives Matter," when one is killed by a cop, but "Black Lives Don't Matter" when blacks kill blacks. This is the stinging hypocrisy of the left.

    The hard left don't care how many blacks kill blacks. They only care to scare blacks into voting democrat.
    Good post Mickey, and Bosox you made an excellent post too! The only place I don't agree with Mickey is with his statement that cops are too "trigger happy". This is a huge over generalization. If that's true why are blacks killing cops at 18 times the rate as cops killing blacks. You could make a strong case that cops are being killed at a high rate because they are too resistant to shoot and use force; that cop's problem is they aren't "trigger happy" enough.

    The point is the media sensationalizes the isolated cases that happen where a cop was too "trigger happy", or "knee happy" in George Floyd's case.

    I also think people are viewing the short video of Derek Chauvin's knee on George without putting it into context of what happened. Listening to the narrative of the press and many people on this site, you'd think Derek woke up that morning wanting to spend the rest of his life in jail. This is the only way his actions make sense, without putting them in context. Regardless if you believe Derek is a racist or not, I don't believe Derek wanted to commit suicide that day.

    To recap what happened: George Floyd resisted arrest for 10 minutes. It's hard to find video of this, but I found some. Then after 10 minutes, it took 4 cops to subdue him. They did this by sitting on him. Even after the cops were sitting on him, George was still resisting. What everybody sees in the video is less than one minute of probably the last minutes of George's life. They are then told by the liberal media that this went on for close to 9 mins, but we aren't shown the previous 7 minutes so it's anybody's guess what really happened.

    This is the same thing that happened with the Rodney King incident. At first the whole incident looked awful, since we only saw the video of the end of Rodney's encounter with the cops. We didn't see the video at the beginning, when Rodney was resisting arrest when he got out of his car, and when he was trying to fight multiple cops. Obviously, it makes no sense Rodney would do this, but he probably wasn't thinking right being high on drugs.

    So the question the jury had to answer is which baton swing was over the top in trying to subdue a violent criminal that was high as a kite on drugs resisting arrest. This isn't an easy question to answer. That's why these cops were acquitted. I would have acquitted them too based on the evidence at that trial.

    In a case like Rodney King, who are you going to side with? A criminal high on drugs attacking cops, or the cops trying to subdue him? MWP and accountinquestion don't need to answer, because I know they will always side with the bad guy.

    This is the same situation with George Floyd. He was high as a kite on drugs and tried to take on an entire police force, and it didn't end well. Did the cops take it too far. Sure.

    It'll be interesting to see how Derek's trial goes, because I expect his lawyer will use the same defense used for the cops in the Rodney King trial. At what point did Derek Chauvin take it too far? Does anybody really think Derek set out to kill a black man that morning? Why didn't George act like a rational human being when he was arrested, and get into the cop car, rather than resisting arrest. Why did so many cops have to sit on George to restrain him? There are still a lot of unanswered questions.

    I'm not defending any of what I saw on the video, but for a country where we're supposed to believe in someone being "presumed innocent until proven guilty", I find it interesting how all the liberals in the media and on this site have already convicted Derek Chauvin without a trial. Or that's right, the idea of "presumed innocent until proven guilty" only applies to blacks who are high on drugs committing crimes and resisting arrest.
    Last edited by Bob21; 06-08-2020 at 04:57 PM.

  20. #20
    Originally Posted by Bob21 View Post
    Originally Posted by mickeycrimm View Post
    Originally Posted by Darkoz View Post
    FNC giving Floyd's criminal past is just a bit of victim shaming that's why.

    The conservative slant is this was a miscarriage of Justice, police brutality, everyone agrees Derek Chauvin should not have held his knee for 8 minutes over Floyd's neck BUT... oh Floyd was a criminal anyway.

    It's the equivalent of exposing rape victims former sexual history.

    It's designed to come up with an excuse for the unexcusable. The video is so compelling that no one wants to get caught saying Floyd was not mistreated so yeah but he had a past.

    How relevant is his past to this case. Almost certainly any mention will be deemed inadmissible during Chauvin court trial.
    I've had a problem with trigger happy cops for decades. To many of them have gone scott free by prosecutor's failing to charge. I have a problem with police unions protecting bad cops. I don't think a cop has to make a kill shot when a suspect with a knife is not within striking distance. I'm for reforms in these areas but not for defunding police departments.

    A white cop killing an unarmed black man is a rare event. Happened only 9 times last year. But about 7000 blacks were killed by other blacks last year. Where is the outrage, the protests? Do you understand the magnitude of difference in cops killing blacks vs. blacks killing blacks? It seems "Black Lives Matter," when one is killed by a cop, but "Black Lives Don't Matter" when blacks kill blacks. This is the stinging hypocrisy of the left.

    The hard left don't care how many blacks kill blacks. They only care to scare blacks into voting democrat.
    Good post Mickey, and Bosox you made an excellent post too! The only place I don't agree with Mickey is with his statement that cops are too "trigger happy". This is a huge over generalization. If that's true why are blacks killing cops at 18 times the rate as cops killing blacks. You could make a strong case that cops are being killed at a high rate because they are too resistant to shoot and use force; that cop's problem is they aren't "trigger happy" enough.

    The point is the media sensationalizes the isolated cases that happen where a cop was too "trigger happy", or "knee happy" in George Floyd's case.

    I also think people are viewing the short video of Derek Chauvin's knee on George without putting it into context of what happened. Listening to the narrative of the press and many people on this site, you'd think Derek woke up that morning wanting to spend the rest of his life in jail. This is the only way his actions make sense, without putting them in context. Regardless if you believe Derek is a racist or not, I don't believe Derek wanted to commit suicide that day.

    To recap what happened: George Floyd resisted arrest for 10 minutes. It's hard to find video of this, but I found some. Then after 10 minutes, it took 4 cops to subdue him. They did this by sitting on him. Even after the cops were sitting on him, George was still resisting. What everybody sees in the video is less than one minute of probably the last minutes of George's life. They are then told by the liberal media that this went on for close to 9 mins, but we aren't shown the previous 7 minutes so it's anybody's guess what really happened.

    This is the same thing that happened with the Rodney King incident. At first the whole incident looked awful, since we only saw the video of the end of Rodney's encounter with the cops. We didn't see the video at the beginning, when Rodney was resisting arrest when he got out of his car, and when he was trying to fight multiple cops. Obviously, it makes no sense Rodney would do this, but he probably wasn't thinking right being high on drugs.

    So the question the jury had to answer is which baton swing was over the top in trying to subdue a violent criminal that was high as a kite on drugs resisting arrest. This isn't an easy question to answer. That's why these cops were acquitted. I would have acquitted them too based on the evidence at that trial.

    In a case like Rodney King, who are you going to side with? A criminal high on drugs attacking cops, or the cops trying to subdue him? MWP and accountinquestion don't need to answer, because I know they will always side with the bad guy.

    This is the same situation with George Floyd. He was high as a kite on drugs and tried to take on an entire police force, and it didn't end well. Did the cops take it too far. Sure.

    It'll be interesting to see how Derek's trial goes, because I expect his lawyer will use the same defense used for the cops in the Rodney King trial. At what point did Derek Chauvin take it too far? Does anybody really think Derek set out to kill a black man that morning? Why didn't George act like a rational human being when he was arrested, and get into the cop car, rather than resisting arrest. Why did so many cops have to sit on George to restrain him? There are still a lot of unanswered questions.

    I'm not defending any of what I saw on the video, but for a country where we're supposed to believe in someone being "presumed innocent until proven guilty", I find it interesting how all the liberals in the media and on this site have already convicted Derek Chauvin without a trial. Or that's right, the idea of "presumed innocent until proven guilty" only applies to blacks who are high on drugs committing crimes and resisting arrest.
    Bob21.

    Before I heard anything from liberal media I watched the entire TEN MINUTES video of him under the knee of Derek.

    8 minutes and change of the knee and a minute of throwing his unconscious body on the gurney and wrapping up.

    Here is the link to the video that shows uncut the last ten minutes of Floyd's life




    For you to say Floyd was only under Derek knee for about a minute is simply not true
    Last edited by Darkoz; 06-08-2020 at 05:16 PM.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Where do you get your news?
    By Alan Mendelson in forum Movies, Media, and Television
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 08-27-2013, 09:18 PM
  2. Now the lawsuits start against Time Warner Cable
    By Alan Mendelson in forum Movies, Media, and Television
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 08-15-2013, 08:32 AM
  3. Two weekends without CBS, KCBS and KCAL on Time Warner Cable
    By Alan Mendelson in forum Movies, Media, and Television
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 08-14-2013, 06:22 AM
  4. Is Time Warner Cable dropping KCBS Channel 2 in So Cal ??
    By Alan Mendelson in forum Movies, Media, and Television
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 08-03-2013, 07:39 PM
  5. HD TV news
    By solidpro in forum Movies, Media, and Television
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 08-31-2010, 04:35 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •