So... fox news, advertising themselves as "fair and balanced" and is by most accounts, especially theirs, the #1 rated news source, is indisputably in the tank for republicans, and you believe CNN is in the tank for Democrats, but its OK for fox and its reprehensible for CNN? Worst case... watch fox if you want the republican/trump slant. And if fox news isn't loony enough, I mean pro-trump enough, watch OAN. Or simply get your news from facebook. If NYT or WaPo bother you, read Washington Times or Washington Examiner. Or Breitbart. There are all sorts of news sources across the political spectrum. There has been a chart that plots where each source is... find it and choose accordingly. Me, I find news all over the spectrum. I think CNN leans left, but they also have people from both left and right. They just hired SE Cupp, one of my favorite conservatives. But my favorite news source is NPR. Both me and my republican wife find it the one station we can agree on. btw, Is it possible trump and Jim Acosta dislike each other, and trump thought he would act presidential and tweet what he thought was a zinger at the Jim Acosta, so the CNN reporter tweeted back? btw, I think there is an over use of twitter in politics, but hey, its trump's thing.
Which Democrat has she worked for? She was on Jeb Bush's transition team in 1998...she served as national co-chair of the Hispanic Advisory Council for John McCain in 2008 and Huntsman in 2012. In the election of 2016 she supported Jeb Bush. She's labelled herself a lifelong Republican because of Reagan and his support for the Contras. I'm unaware of any Democrat she worked for. She didn't vote for Trump, but if that makes her a Democrat then so was the Bush family and John McCain.
Do you consider "Walls are IMMORAL" concrete? Please do elaborate. Yes, they are. They are talking about the whole wall, which isn't what is being discussed, therefore they don't apply to this situation, therefore they are...abstract. They also don't address the FACT that where the wall has been built, illegal immigrant crossing have dropped over 90%. Nor do they address the FACT that border control with no border is IMPOSSIBLE. Nor do they address that the wall is just PART of border security. So, yes abstract (and biased) all over the place. Any other questions? Spout rhetoric much? Was it Obama's vanity wall when he wanted it? Just curious.... Nope, that's quite easy. Illegal crossings have dropped significantly everywhere its been built. Video evidence was overwhelming if you watch the footage when the Hondurans reached the wall. [/QUOTE] The simple fact is that border control without a barrier is NOT POSSIBLE. Say you set up the immigration checkpoints that way, with no physical barriers. How would you ensure people actually went through the checkpoints, and didn't simply just cross over the border? Please do elaborate on what we're missing.
Oh, wow, you're great at making straw men and assumptions. When did I say that? Oh that's right, I didn't. If Fox News were to go out and wrap themselves in the cloak of victim hood and act as if the foundation of the Free Press and the Republic is being eroded by the Presidents attacks, like CNN has done, when under attack by a Democratic administration, I would find it equally laughable. They are totally in the tank for the Republicans. Fox News isn't in that situation right now though.... so it wouldn't make a whole lot of sense to attack them for something they haven't done..
Yea... in trump's land of make believe. However in the real world... https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...for-shutdown-reuters-ipsos-poll-idUSKCN1P223U https://thehill.com/homenews/admini...rumps-wall-funding-demand-call-for-compromise https://poll.qu.edu/national/release-detail?ReleaseID=2590
There is nothing in the Constitution that says that a member of the White House press corps cannot be banned for misbehavior. Member of the White House press corps are not kings..... Hell the White House press corps didn't even exist until about 100 years ago.
Yea, if Fox News where to wrap themselves in the cloak of victimhood and cry that a Democratic President was eroding the foundation of the Republic and attacking the "Free Press" when he criticized them for being bias, I would consider that equally disingenuous.
And Trump was a Democrat in 2006 and has donated to Bill and Hillary Clinton. Is he now only for a wall because he’s a “blue team bad” drone?
It is in response to your point that CNN is draping themselves in victimhood as if this President hasn't given them grounds or reason to do so.
This criticism is logically inconsistent given that Hillary Clinton was one of the Democrats who vocally supported and voted for building walls along the border in 2006, walls that have been effective.....so it's the Democrats that have changed their opinion, not Trump. I mean, Trump flip flops a lot, just not on this.
I'm pretty sure the world must be much worse off than I imagined if we've drawn MadMax back into posting in the D&D after swearing it off something like a decade ago.
So she worked for Republicans repeatedly...including for the campaign of one of them to be president in 2016....but she raised funds for a Democratic congressman once, so she's a Democrat? I mean we're not talking about her support of Republicans decades ago...we're talking about the very last Presidential election she worked for a campaign to have a Republican elected. She's not comfy with Trump...like a lot of people I know who have identified as Republican for most of their lives.
They were not disingenous then? Are you going to deny that Fox news was not catering to a specific party and only that party? According to your description, they clearly should be "above reproach"? Unless you define "free press" as media who only agrees with your views, then I digress.
Uh? This post makes little sense and is hard to discern. I was able to dig out, "Are you going to deny that Fox news was not catering to a specific party and only that party?" Answer - Fox News is in the tank for the Republicans, I think I've said that like 3 times in the last hour here. I like how all these posters keep pointing to Fox News, as if I am a huge fan and that is some sort of justification for CNN's dis-ingenuousness.
I think it's probably a good sign if people are dipping back in and not just instantly thinking it's far too toxic to want to stick around. Not that long ago, that would have been the case.
I think it's probably telling that they view CNN as no different than Fox News and it kind of proves your point.
Fair, true....and I would say true all along. I personally welcome valid criticism of Trump and every other President. It's one thing being critical, it's another thing having constantly slanted negative coverage. Even Trump himself has said he doesn't mind criticism...and providing criticism IN AN OBJECTIVE FASHION is absolutely the job of the media. The problem is it has devolved to where that's very seldom the case, and it's pretty much never been the case since about the time the general election was set, and really became the norm after the election. There were comparisons with Hitler during his inauguration...on national news networks. That's about as biased as it can get.
