Note to self: Chuck doesn't know what an analogy is.
Printable View
Yes, Chris Matthews. Former aide to Tip O'Neill, and many others. Failed political candidate.
Then there's George Stephanopoulos, who just interviewed the President of the United States on ABC News, about Afghanistan.
George Stephanopoulos has a Masters in Theology and worked on the Dukakis and Clinton campaigns. He served in the Clinton Whitehouse.
But it's unreasonable to be skeptical and consider that there might just be some bias present from these now "journalists".
Perhaps the best comment is to explain what I do. I read people I know who have a different perspective than I do. For example, I might read about the Black Lives Matter movement to try to understand what the group thinks. It is not that I disagree or think they are wrong. Let's say you hear someone disparaging the movement either on the air or in your group of friend. Since you've taken the time to find out what they think, you will be better able to determine if what you are hearing from your sources is true or not.
Secondly, if I am reading an opinion article I already know by the headline what's coming, but I read it anyway. For me, I am more informed. If I only read information that leads to what I have decided is true, then I am not really informed, but having my bias confirmed. It seems to me this is where most people are in their search for information and it is dangerous.
During the Vietnam era parents listened and believed the government. Their children were the ones protesting. The parents wanted their children to stop protesting and trust the government they trusted in WW2. Eventually it was found out the failures of the government. Today the same thing is occuring. The people who don't go along to get along are in a position to be more informed and I think objective.
"Why Biden’s Lack of Strategic Patience Led to Disaster"
This is an opinion piece from the New York Times this morning. If you call yourself a believer the Times is biased, why would they print an op-ed with such a title? This one reason I take issue with making blanket statements about journalists and agencies. Your opinions don't support the truth, but it probably makes you feel good, or more likely smug.
The New York Times is one of the best newspapers on the planet. Is it perfect, no. Has it had professional lapses, yes. Does its news and features tend to slant progressive in tone, yes. Is the quality of its writing and reporting among the best in the world...yes. Is it oracular truth from God...no.
edited to add: I read my local paper 100 times more often than I read the NYT. But I can clearly tell which one is a better work of journalism.
I honestly think your comprehension is compromised. Slow down. Now what is the writer trying to say…lol!
CN-
No, I don't believe you "honestly" think my comprehension is compromised. You are sliding off point without responding. Please take some time away, and try to compose yourself.
I’m wasting time here. If others are interested, please respond to the topic.
Sorry. There's no graceful way to lose a war.
Rather than blaming Biden, why don't you look at those who got us there in the first place: Bush the Lesser (whose Daddy problem pivoted him to another costly debacle in Iraq), Tony Blair, the cheerleaders in the media (if it bleeds, it leads), and the stupid legislators who jumped on the bandwagon for war, as a way of getting more votes.
Two lessons: 1) violence and military occupation is a bad way to teach democratic values; 2) Don't trust the military to tell the truth or judge their own performance. They will lie and obfuscate to get more money and more war toys.
I worked in professional radio in one capacity or another for 32 years. Lots of time (about 11/12 years) on air, live, listening to news casts, editing wire copy (AP and UPI), lots of time on the road as the engineer, to translators and stations listening to NPR and CBC in addition to other stations. It was interesting to watch the spin on a story develop after an initial event, and then then settle down to an echo chamber response on all of the liberal media. Its as if an email went out with the talking points on the subject. CBC is liberal, but then they didn't pretend to be unbiased either. What is not reported, the details that are left out, or are dropped change a story as much as what you are told. All that it takes is dropped sentence to make what one would consider to be a reasonable action in one hours news cast, to a total loner idiot in the next hours reading of what was otherwise the same script. Today there is no pretense of even, unbiased reporting. Its all about spin, with the result that my BS meter is pegged with both liberal and conservative sources.
Every administration in the last 20 years screwed up in Afghanistan. The original mistake was going in. Biden just ended things with a spectacular screw up.
Read broadly and don’t depend on radio or TV.
CNN: McConnell: 'There isn't going to be an impeachment' of Biden.
https://www.cnn.com/2021/09/01/polit...den/index.html
Of course not. What has been done with the impeachment process (since 1990) for political reasons is a travesty.
Sent from my moto g power using Tapatalk
Lest we forget, an interesting read. I read Bolton's books for an insider perspective.
https://www.businessinsider.com/john...rrorist%20base.
In a bombshell report on Aug. 31, Reuters reported on an audio recording of a July 23 call between Biden and then-Afghan President Ashraf Ghani. It released a transcript. In the call, Biden stated, “I need not tell you the perception around the world and in parts of Afghanistan, I believe, is that things aren’t going well in terms of the fight against the Taliban.”
Biden then gave Ghani his marching orders: “And there is a need, whether it is true or not, there is a need to project a different picture.”
https://www.reuters.com/world/exclus...on-2021-08-31/