NewsFlash! Republicans do not care about you.

[Bullseye]

Wilbur Ross doesn't 'quite understand' why furloughed workers are going to homeless shelters to get food

But, they will be happy to lend you money. :lamo



You just cannot make this **** up. No one would believe it.

LOL, at least he offered a suggestion. Pelosi's idea was "**** 'em. I deal with them when I get back from me junket."

ETA: I believe he walked that comment back a couple of days ago.

 

[marke]

Wilbur Ross doesn't 'quite understand' why furloughed workers are going to homeless shelters to get food

But, they will be happy to lend you money. :lamo
You just cannot make this **** up. No one would believe it.

I agree. Taking out loans is a stupid suggestion. Besides, taking out loans for poor Americans suffering from decades of high taxes and low wages will be impossible for many who have less than good credit because they are poor. Trump may just have to declare a national emergency in order to secure the funding to pay these workers, even over the objections of democrats who will certainly try to stop him from providing that relief on his terms instead of theirs.

 

[Luckyone]

when the media lies 100 times a day, it's real easy for the "underclass" to buy it as truth. That doesn't make it true though. The democrats are every bit as elitist as republicans, if not, more so, because they have no qualms selling out the entire country to foreign interests. At least when republicans do it, they're careful not to insult the predominate culture in the process. The democrats, however, just look at the fringe that they claim to represent, because it's not the working class, but the politics of Hollywood elites.

You are "in a world of your own" and reality does not exist for you. The media does NOT lie. They can't or the would be sued. They may give opinions that slant the news one way or the other but generally speaking unless a "mistake" is made, they report the news as it is. Show me 10 examples of the media lying where it was not an honest mistake. Should be easy for you since you say they lie 100 times a day.

There are elitists in each group given that there are poor and there are rich in each group. Nonetheless, the Republicans by nature and stated purpose want "individual" advancement on a financial basis and there it is easy to realize that they are more likely to "sell out" the country than not, given that financial gain is their sole purpose. Whereas the Democrats by nature and stated purpose want to spread the wealth so that "everyone" gets a share, meaning they are not selling out the country, just the opposite, they are helping the country get better by helping everyone.

As far as insults are concerned, you cannot find any party or person than insults others more than Trump. He is the king of the kings as far as insults are concerned.

You really need to use your brain and common sense a bit more and think about things. It really is easy as not everything has hidden agenda and motives. Greed is greed everywhere and it is very simple to see who are the givers and who are the takers and generally speaking, the Republicans are takers and the Democrats are givers though there will always be exceptions as is the case with everything in life.

Stop believing what you read and hear and start using COMMON SENSE and you will realize that things are simpler and not as you now think them to be.

 

[DarkWizard12]

You are "in a world of your own" and reality does not exist for you. The media does NOT lie. They can't or the would be sued. They may give opinions that slant the news one way or the other but generally speaking unless a "mistake" is made, they report the news as it is. Show me 10 examples of the media lying where it was not an honest mistake. Should be easy for you since you say they lie 100 times a day.

Excuse me....you're weren't saying what you really mean here. You said "The Media does NOT lie", what you REALLY mean is "Only left wing media does not lie....Fox news et al, lies all the time....and yet, I don't expect them to get sued like the totally accountable lefty media would be".

That's what you really mean, and I feel the notion is so riduculous as to be not worth addressing. UNLESS, you mean that neither CNN or fox news lies, in which case, would be equally as ridiculous because it's like saying that 2 contradictory opinions on the same event(as they report) can't be wrong.....because both of them would be sued...somehow...

There are elitists in each group given that there are poor and there are rich in each group. Nonetheless, the Republicans by nature and stated purpose want "individual" advancement on a financial basis and there it is easy to realize that they are more likely to "sell out" the country than not, given that financial gain is their sole purpose. Whereas the Democrats by nature and stated purpose want to spread the wealth so that "everyone" gets a share, meaning they are not selling out the country, just the opposite, they are helping the country get better by helping everyone.

No, it's not just the elitest in these groups. It's people, mainly the lower classes, who CHOOSE to be useful pawns of such groups. People like you, who willfully promote the democrat party. I'm not blind to the sins of the republicans, mind you, I know their character quite well, but people confuse my hatred of the democrat party for my love of republicans. That is wrong. When republicans are right, I will agree with them. When they are not, I will not agree with them. Nothing has to be a "take all or none" gambit here. I can recognize the faults of the republicans without ever endorsing the democrats.

As far as insults are concerned, you cannot find any party or person than insults others more than Trump. He is the king of the kings as far as insults are concerned.

When I said "insults" I wasn't talking about quips on social media. Read my post again, the meaning was quite clear even if you choose to miss it.

You really need to use your brain and common sense a bit more and think about things. It really is easy as not everything has hidden agenda and motives. Greed is greed everywhere and it is very simple to see who are the givers and who are the takers and generally speaking, the Republicans are takers and the Democrats are givers though there will always be exceptions as is the case with everything in life.

I have read Adam Smith, Karl Marx, Kant, Dostoevsky, Johnathan Swift, Voltaire, and Robespierre, Rosseau, and Hobbes, Carl Jung, and that's just the beginner's list, in my search of political truth. Yet, you tell me to use my brain? How many books have you read? If you are reducing 2 sides to such simplistically erroneous beliefs, you are clearly not using your head. It's not a matter of "Exceptions", that's the rule. They're both takers. The only time I vote republican is when the democrat candidate shows themselves to be entire bonkers, although my small town in Texas actually has a democrat mayor.

Stop believing what you read and hear and start using COMMON SENSE and you will realize that things are simpler and not as you now think them to be.

I got to where I was because of common sense, and a lot of intense reading. You got to where you were because buzzfeed...which NEVER lies.

 

[Luckyone]

I get it right because I actually read, and since my times in Iraq, I've learned first hand just how manipulative the news is(and it's not just them, it's every actor to one extent to another). I don't watch the news anymore, i sold my TV years ago. I read books, end of story. If you truly believe the democrats are better than republicans, then maybe you're not motivated by your love your country but purely for your self interest, or so you believe.

If you are going to make all these outlandish statements, why don't you actually try to prove them with facts and figures? Words are cheap and mean nothing since anyone can say anything they want or think without repercussions or cost. Nonetheless, when you say that you have first hand knowledge of how manipulative the news is, then it should be very easy for you to prove your statement. Then again, understand that there is a big difference between opinion and truth. A fact can be reported but 2 different opinions can given for why it happened. Nonetheless, it remains a fact.

If you don't listen to the opinions given but review the fact based on your own knowledge, set of principles, and morals/ethics, you can understand the truth for what it is and not for the slant given.

and by the way, "I don't watch the news anymore, I read books" is a ridiculous statement about the truth. You think that books are any different than news on the TV? It is as easy to lie or give a biased slant in a book as it is on TV. A book is the same thing as an article written for TV.

and also by the way, depending on what your goals in life are, honest people can say that the Republicans are better than the Democrats and say exactly the opposite as well and both be correct. It depends on what is important to you. If money is the most important thing to you, then of course you will think the Republicans are better since they are all about money and keeping it for themselves. If you care about other people and are a giver, then you will say the Democrats are better since they are all about spreading the wealth and helping other people. Both statements can be true, depending on your own goals.

 

[DarkWizard12]

If you are going to make all these outlandish statements, why don't you actually try to prove them with facts and figures? Words are cheap and mean nothing since anyone can say anything they want or think without repercussions or cost. Nonetheless, when you say that you have first hand knowledge of how manipulative the news is, then it should be very easy for you to prove your statement. Then again, understand that there is a big difference between opinion and truth. A fact can be reported but 2 different opinions can given for why it happened. Nonetheless, it remains a fact.

If you don't listen to the opinions given but review the fact based on your own knowledge, set of principles, and morals/ethics, you can understand the truth for what it is and not for the slant given.

and by the way, "I don't watch the news anymore, I read books" is a ridiculous statement about the truth. You think that books are any different than news on the TV? It is as easy to lie or give a biased slant in a book as it is on TV. A book is the same thing as an article written for TV.

and also by the way, depending on what your goals in life are, honest people can say that the Republicans are better than the Democrats and say exactly the opposite. It depends on what is important to you. If money is the most important thing to you, then of course you will think the Republicans are better since they are all about money and keeping it for themselves. If you care about other people and are a giver, then you will say the Democrats are better since they are all about spreading the wealth and helping other people. Both statements can be true, depending on your own goals.

If it were about money, I would vote democrat. But it's not about money, it's about culture.

 

[Luckyone]

If it were about money, I would vote democrat. But it's not about money, it's about culture.

I don't see your valid reason for saying that. Republicans believe that spreading the wealth of the nation among all citizens is wrong. They believe that if you have the talent to make money you should not have to share it with someone that does not have the same talent. The key statement is wealth, which is MONEY. The Democrats believe in social security, in welfare, in taxing the rich more than the poor, and they believe that we are all a family that needs to work together to stay together.

As such, your statement about "if it were about money, I would vote Democrat" is patently ridiculous.

As far as culture is concerned, that word is a broad word and you need to explain exactly how you are applying it.

 

[DarkWizard12]

I don't see your valid reason for saying that. Republicans believe that spreading the wealth of the nation among all citizens is wrong. They believe that if you have the talent to make money you should not have to share it with someone that does not have the same talent. The key statement is wealth, which is MONEY. The Democrats believe in social security, in welfare, in taxing the rich more than the poor, and they believe that we are all a family that needs to work together to stay together.

As such, your statement about "if it were about money, I would vote Democrat" is patently ridiculous.

As far as culture is concerned, that word is a broad word and you need to explain exactly how you are applying it.

But I'm lower-class. You say I have all this to gain by voting democrat. Of course if it were just about money, I would vote democrat. You just admitted it.

However, if you read adam smith, you wouldn't have made such ridiculous statements. Wealth isn't JUST money. In fact, in 1700's england, the highest form of wealth wasn't money, but property. Thomas jefferson writes quite a bit against the "moneyed interests" and despite creative-destruction being the status quo in our jurisprudence now, it hasn't entirely changed since then.

 

[Luckyone]

But I'm lower-class. You say I have all this to gain by voting democrat. Of course if it were just about money, I would vote democrat. You just admitted it.

However, if you read adam smith, you wouldn't have made such ridiculous statements. Wealth isn't JUST money. In fact, in 1700's england, the highest form of wealth wasn't money, but property. Thomas jefferson writes quite a bit against the "moneyed interests" and despite creative-destruction being the status quo in our jurisprudence now, it hasn't entirely changed since then.

"Of course if it were just about money, I would vote Democrat". You are not making sense and I have no patience to explain it to you.

In addition, you have made some strong statements in your last 4 posts and you have yet to prove any of them being anything more that a twisted idea in your brain. Where is the proof I asked you to provide regarding the media?

I have a feeling that all you are doing is talking for the sake of being heard but have nothing to back up your opinions.

Keep up with your twisted ideas. I am not going to be one that is debating them with you anymore until such a time that you back up what you say with facts and figures.

 

[DarkWizard12]

"Of course if it were just about money, I would vote Democrat". You are not making sense and I have no patience to explain it to you.

I am lower class. You say I have free healthcare and social security and all this to gain if I vote democrat. Therefore, if I wanted money in my pocket, I should vote democrat, yes? I gain no money by voting republican, don't you agree?

In addition, you have made some strong statements in your last 4 posts and you have yet to prove any of them being anything more that a twisted idea in your brain. Where is the proof I asked you to provide regarding the media?

You didn't complete your idea. Everyone knows that fox news lies. Yet, you would still say that the media doesn't lie in such a bold faced statement? hmmm.
I have a feeling that all you are doing is talking for the sake of being heard but have nothing to back up your opinions.

Keep up with your twisted ideas. I am not going to be one that is debating them with you anymore until such a time that you back up what you say with facts and figures.

My ideas are the only things based on anything intellectual between us. You are a mental slave and you proved that when you dared to say "the corporate owned media doesn't lie". Such a notion is so ridiculous, that only a pre-2000's conservative could have said such a thing.

 

[Luckyone]

I am lower class. You say I have free healthcare and social security and all this to gain if I vote democrat. Therefore, if I wanted money in my pocket, I should vote democrat, yes? I gain no money by voting republican, don't you agree?


You didn't complete your idea. Everyone knows that fox news lies. Yet, you would still say that the media doesn't lie in such a bold faced statement? hmmm.
I have a feeling that all you are doing is talking for the sake of being heard but have nothing to back up your opinions.

My ideas are the only things based on anything intellectual between us. You are a mental slave and you proved that when you dared to say "the corporate owned media doesn't lie". Such a notion is so ridiculous, that only a pre-2000's conservative could have said such a thing.

Prove that the corporate owned media lies. Give me examples.

 

[Luckyone]

But I'm lower-class. You say I have all this to gain by voting democrat. Of course if it were just about money, I would vote democrat. You just admitted it.

If you vote Democrat you gain money?

I don't understand what you are saying. If you vote Republican you are "for" people with talent making money without having to share any of it. If you vote Democrat, what you are voting for is a for fair distribution of wealth, meaning the rich pay more taxes than the poor.

If you vote Democrat you do not get wealth, you get help. It is not a vote "for money" but for fairness. Your statement suggests that voting for the Democrats meant that the Democrats are driven by money and for themselves, which is not true. That definition applies to the Republicans.

On this you are totally confused and is probably the reason why you are making such uninformed and incorrect statements.

By the way, property IS WEALTH. If you own 10 properties worth $1 million each, you have $10 million dollars. Properties are valued in dollars, not in kisses or hugs.

 

[DarkWizard12]

If you vote Democrat you gain money?

That's what you said. am I to think that all the benefits they promise, free healthcare, higher minimum wage, etc, are lies?

I don't understand what you are saying. If you vote Republican you are "for" people with talent making money without having to share any of it. If you vote Democrat, what you are voting for is a for fair distribution of wealth, meaning the rich pay more taxes than the poor.

And as a lower class person, it would be in my financial interest to vote for the party promising distrubition of wealth, because i would be getting wealth. 5 posts in and you still don't get it, I don't know why you don't get. IF I WANTED WEALTH, as you describe, I should vote democrat. That is what you have said over and over.

If you vote Democrat you do not get wealth, you get help. It is not a vote "for money" but for fairness. Your statement suggests that voting for the Democrats meant that the Democrats are driven by money and for themselves, which is not true. That definition applies to the Republicans.

Again, you can call it what you want. The truth is, it is my financial interests, as a lower class man, to vote democrat. that's what I'm trying to tell you. If it were about money, i would vote democrat, so that my pocket book would be richer.

On this you are totally confused and is probably the reason why you are making such uninformed and incorrect statements.

You are the one making incorrect statements by building a strawman of my own. If you don't understand what I'm saying, why don't you just ask questions instead of pretending you know everything, when you clearly just lazily copy and paste buzzwords from Buzzfeed?

By the way, property IS WEALTH. If you own 10 properties worth $1 million each, you have $10 million dollars. Properties are valued in dollars, not in kisses or hugs.

yea, I know, I'm the one that told you that lol.

 

[DarkWizard12]

Prove that the corporate owned media lies. Give me examples.

Let's start with something I think both of us can agree on: The Iraq War. In the lead up to the Iraq war, Jonathan Landay and Warren Strobel were among the few journalists who cut through the lies and cited how the media ignored them and buried their stories, being only reported on by smaller outlets. That's an example for you, according to them, and as someone who's been Iraq, I tend to agree. The Iraq war were clear examples of media bias and lies to support the Bush administration and the military-industrial complex.

Thankfully, in this example, we actually have the media admitting their failure (second example), making this a very cut and dry case. My question to you would be, if the media can fail on something so consequential as this, how much more so everything else? Just look at reporting on the Syrian war. Trump escalates it, they say how dare he, Trump wants to withdraw, and then every voice they have on their talk shows are suddenly pro-war. This isn't a new thing, the media loves war and pretends otherwise.

 

[Luckyone]

And as a lower class person, it would be in my financial interest to vote for the party promising distrubition of wealth, because i would be getting wealth. 5 posts in and you still don't get it, I don't know why you don't get. IF I WANTED WEALTH, as you describe, I should vote democrat. That is what you have said over and over.

Discussing anything with you is like trying to eat Jello while an earthquake is happening.

If I wanted wealth, I would vote Democrat? What kind of reasoning is that? Wealth is having MORE than you can use or want. It is NOT just having enough to survive or live. As such, if you wanted wealth you would vote Republican since they are the ones that open the door for you to have as much wealth as you can achieve without any restrictions. If you vote Democrat, you would not be voting for wealth given that they will try to tax you more the more you make, meaning you would be LESS wealthy.

This has nothing to do with your present situation of being without money. It is not about your situation but about your ability to make money and keep it all.

 

[DarkWizard12]

Discussing anything with you is like trying to eat Jello while an earthquake is happening.

If I wanted wealth, I would vote Democrat? What kind of reasoning is that? Wealth is having MORE than you can use or want. It is NOT just having enough to survive or live. As such, if you wanted wealth you would vote Republican since they are the ones that open the door for you to have as much wealth as you can achieve without any restrictions. If you vote Democrat, you would not be voting for wealth given that they will try to tax you more the more you make, meaning you would be LESS wealthy.

This has nothing to do with your present situation of being without money. It is not about your situation but about your ability to make money and keep it all.

But you don't know that. What if I'm handicapped and need free healthcare and more disability payments? The democrats promise me a social safety that I don't have and that the republicans don't want to give. If it were about money, as I said, it's only the democrats that are promising me anything. Why would I vote republican? They don't promise me wealth....unless I can somehow work, which I can't.

as i said, if it were solely about money, I should vote democrat. They're the only ones promising me anything to take care of myself.

 

[Luckyone]

Let's start with something I think both of us can agree on: The Iraq War. In the lead up to the Iraq war, Jonathan Landay and Warren Strobel were among the few journalists who cut through the lies and cited how the media ignored them and buried their stories, being only reported on by smaller outlets. That's an example for you, according to them, and as someone who's been Iraq, I tend to agree. The Iraq war were clear examples of media bias and lies to support the Bush administration and the military-industrial complex.

The key issue in this debate is LIES. In your example, you are saying that the media ignored them and buried their stories. This is not a lie, it is ignoring a truth, which is something totally different.

Lie | Define Lie at Dictionary.com:

to speak falsely or utter untruth knowingly, as with intent to deceive. to express what is false; convey a false impression.

Thankfully, in this example, we actually have the media admitting their failure (second example), making this a very cut and dry case. My question to you would be, if the media can fail on something so consequential as this, how much more so everything else? Just look at reporting on the Syrian war. Trump escalates it, they say how dare he, Trump wants to withdraw, and then every voice they have on their talk shows are suddenly pro-war. This isn't a new thing, the media loves war and pretends otherwise.

Failure is a human trait, meaning that failure is not unforgivable. Everyone fails at some point in their lives. The media is not immune to this. Failure is not lying.

Once again for the debate, you are stating that the media lies all the time and I have said they don't LIE. They may bend the truth to their viewpoint but they don't lie about it. They do not say that 10,000 innocent children were separated from their mothers if only 1000 were separated. They say that the President did not have humanity when doing it.

You have not proven your point about lies. I grant you that they bend the truth to their bias, but they do not lie. If you are an intelligent and common sense person you can wash away the bias and come up with the truth, based on what they said. For example in the example I gave you. The important thing to gather from children being separated from their mothers is the act itself. It does not matter whether it was 1, 1000 or 10000, what matters is that the President did not have any humanity.

One more skewed post by you will cause me to stop talking to you.

 

[Luckyone]

But you don't know that. What if I'm handicapped and need free healthcare and more disability payments? The democrats promise me a social safety that I don't have and that the republicans don't want to give. If it were about money, as I said, it's only the democrats that are promising me anything. Why would I vote republican? They don't promise me wealth....unless I can somehow work, which I can't.

as i said, if it were solely about money, I should vote democrat. They're the only ones promising me anything to take care of myself.

I have to laugh at your way of thinking. First of all, you say that if you vote Democrat you are voting for wealth. No, you are not because the definition of wealth is having more than you need. The key word is NEED. The Democrats do not offer more than you need, they offer what you need. The Republican do not offer what you need, they just offer the ability to get as much as you want if you can. If you cannot see how wrong you are in your statements, I am wasting my time talking to you because these definition misunderstandings are so basic that to argue them with anyone is like twiddling your thumbs while your family is being assaulted.

 

[DarkWizard12]

The key issue in this debate is LIES. In your example, you are saying that the media ignored them and buried their stories. This is not a lie, it is ignoring a truth, which is something totally different.

Lie | Define Lie at Dictionary.com:

to speak falsely or utter untruth knowingly, as with intent to deceive. to express what is false; convey a false impression.

Journalists are supposed to learn writing.

'Lying by omission, also known as a continuing misrepresentation or quote mining, occurs when an important fact is left out in order to foster a misconception. Lying by omission includes the failure to correct pre-existing misconceptions. For example, when the seller of a car declares it has been serviced regularly but does not mention that a fault was reported during the last service, the seller lies by omission. It can be compared to dissimulation. An omission is when a person tells most of the truth, but leaves out a few key facts that therefore completely change the story."

Ericsson, Stephanie (2010). Patterns for College Writing (11th ed.). St. martins: Bedford. p. 487.

One more skewed post by you will cause me to stop talking to you.

How will I ever survive?

 

[DarkWizard12]

I have to laugh at your way of thinking. First of all, you say that if you vote Democrat you are voting for wealth. No, you are not because the definition of wealth is having more than you need. The key word is NEED. The Democrats do not offer more than you need, they offer what you need. The Republican do not offer what you need, they just offer the ability to get as much as you want if you can. If you cannot see how wrong you are in your statements, I am wasting my time talking to you because these definition misunderstandings are so basic that to argue them with anyone is like twiddling your thumbs while your family is being assaulted.

So wait, if your problem is that I used the word wealth then why are you just now bringing it up, when in my original post, I said "If it was about money, I would vote democrat?". Money being, well....more money in my pocketbook. It seems like you're choosing to argue over the purposeless details, solely to avoid discussing anything valuable. I think you know precisely what I meant at this point, and so we should continue with the topic and progress further now, don't you think?

 

[Luckyone]

Journalists are supposed to learn writing.

'Lying by omission, also known as a continuing misrepresentation or quote mining, occurs when an important fact is left out in order to foster a misconception. Lying by omission includes the failure to correct pre-existing misconceptions. For example, when the seller of a car declares it has been serviced regularly but does not mention that a fault was reported during the last service, the seller lies by omission. It can be compared to dissimulation. An omission is when a person tells most of the truth, but leaves out a few key facts that therefore completely change the story."

If you are testifying in court, for example, you have no obligation to answer a question that is not asked, so that form of omission of information would not be considered lying, meaning that in your example the fact the car seller declared the car had been serviced regularly is not lying (because it was serviced regularly). What the man should have asked is whether "any fault been found in the car when it was serviced"

How will I ever survive?

You can't survive because you are not looking for the truth. You are simply looking to support your contentions without considering if you are right or wrong. It is impossible to debate with such a person.

 

[Luckyone]

So wait, if your problem is that I used the word wealth then why are you just now bringing it up, when in my original post, I said "If it was about money, I would vote democrat?". Money being, well....more money in my pocketbook. It seems like you're choosing to argue over the purposeless details, solely to avoid discussing anything valuable. I think you know precisely what I meant at this point, and so we should continue with the topic and progress further now, don't you think?

when you used "if it was about money" the stated idea is that money = wealth.

No interest in talking further.

 

[DarkWizard12]

when you used "if it was about money" the stated idea is that money = wealth.

As a reader of adam smith....and many other philosophers from the 18th century, I can tell you that that's not entirely true.

 

[DarkWizard12]

If you are testifying in court, for example, you have no obligation to answer a question that is not asked, so that form of omission of information would not be considered lying, meaning that in your example the fact the car seller declared the car had been serviced regularly is not lying (because it was serviced regularly). What the man should have asked is whether "any fault been found in the car when it was serviced"

The court of public opinion isn't like the court of the legal structure. Opinions matter. Omissions matter. Actions matter. Ethics in journalism matters. What you have told me is actually the root cause of media dysfunction today. The burden of proof in the legal system is so high, that the media can get away with a lot of lies and outright bias. What you have said isn't what's right with the media, it's what's wrong the media, and why people no longer trust them. Take, for example, the recent covington scandal. All the media had to do was check their sources and it never would have been a thing, but no one bothered to do that until it was too late.

The public deserves better than what the media gives it. They lie, spin, and cheat for money and political power. We have less a free press, and more a government-media complex that sells clickbait.

You can't survive because you are not looking for the truth. You are simply looking to support your contentions without considering if you are right or wrong. It is impossible to debate with such a person.

lol I was ridiculing you there. You need to look in the mirror.

 

[Luckyone]

The court of public opinion isn't like the court of the legal structure. Opinions matter. Omissions matter. Actions matter. Ethics in journalism matters. What you have told me is actually the root cause of media dysfunction today. The burden of proof in the legal system is so high, that the media can get away with a lot of lies and outright bias. What you have said isn't what's right with the media, it's what's wrong the media, and why people no longer trust them. Take, for example, the recent covington scandal. All the media had to do was check their sources and it never would have been a thing, but no one bothered to do that until it was too late.

The public deserves better than what the media gives it. They lie, spin, and cheat for money and political power. We have less a free press, and more a government-media complex that sells clickbait.

I am sorry but this last post of yours really did me in as far as my interest in talking to you any further.

This is reality and not fantasy. The problems we are talking about have to do with what people are and not with what you would like them to be. We are not going to change what the media does, we are not going to change what people do, we are not going to change what the Republicans or the Democrats want or how they see things. The perfect world is not going to happen and never has happened before. What is right and wrong is not what we are trying to determine but what can be accomplished or not.

"The public deserves better than what the media gives it" is pure B.S. because the media is what it is because that is what people do. People are generally flawed and so is the media and etc. etc. etc.

Yes, we would all like perfection but to accomplish it we have to start with asking perfection from ourselves and that is not going to happen, at least not to 99.9% of the people.

So don't give me this high and mighty oration about what things should be. Get down to what reality is and when you understand what reality is, changes can be made or at least attempted.

For example, the media does not lie but does slant things in their favor. We are not going to change the media so what we have to do is find ways to seek the truth ourselves. How do we do that? we use common sense, we use past experiences, we use law, we listen to every side and parse what is truth and what is bias out of it. We don't try to change anything but our own knowledge and ability to comprehend what is needed to be done to make a difference. We do not blame others for our ills except when those ills are a direct result of the action of others (such as Trump's actions). By doing this, we can at least make a change in ourselves to better cope with the situation. Complaining is useless as it won't change anything. Trump is a perfect example of that. I have never seen anyone complain so much about others and yet he has not been able to change anything though he is President and in a position to do so (neither you nor I have that luxury). You think your complaining and pointing out the mistakes being made is being heard by anyone? Hell no.

Changes can be made but they will be made inch by inch and not by a wide swath. It all starts by understanding the problem and changing ourselves enough to be able to talk about it with others in a way that understanding can be accomplished. This is a small step but if enough of these occur, a small change occurs.

This is not what you are doing or even trying to do. You are trying to make me see a problem as you see it. I am way ahead of you given that I already know what the problems are and what I am trying to do is get down to the reality of it (humans are flawed by nature) and from there we can start to make changes. You cannot even communicate intelligently with me.

Good bye