• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

When the need to attack becomes more important than the truth

In the last week, I have been astounded at the number of phony threads that have popped up in the "bias in the media" forum created purely to attack political adversaries. I'm talking about threads centered around manipulating and twisting the facts, or were simply based on flat out lies.

When did people become so wrapped up in politics and so desperate to discredit those who don't see eye to eye with them, that the truth became optional? Here's a few examples of what I'm talking about:

"The Ben Rhodes Email: Fox's New (False) Benghazi Attack"
This was a false attack on Fox News that used a senate report that came out before the emails and other relevant testimony was given about the incident. What was said by various people on the network was well founded and the basis for the special investigation being put together now.


"Fox lies. Says Oregon Senate candidate was kicked out of meeting"
This was just a flat out lie... The man was kicked out of the meeting.


"Fox news won't cover WH presser if Benghazi isn't the topic"
This attack was based on a totally false premise. Fox News doesn't normally cover WH press conferences live in the first place, unless the topic is tied with an important or breaking story. The special investigation was just announced by congress and if the topic came up at the presser, they were going to cover it.


"Sarah Palin's baptism comment go unreported by FOX News or affiliates:"
This is another phony attack because neither ABC or NBC covered it on their network or their websites, CBS only had a video of her speech on their website with no story or commentary, and CNN only had an op-ed on their website written by a blogger, and nothing on their cable network about it. In other words, it wasn't an important story to the 4 other news networks either. And to top it off, the Fox News website "Fox Nation" did publish an article about it the day she made the speech.


"Fox News Blames Benghazi and Malaysia Flight on Obama"
This was another complete and absolute lie based on a story published at Raw Story titled "Fox & Friends’ links Benghazi, missing Malaysia flight — and blames Obama for both..." It featured a video clip as proof, but the problem is, nobody at Fox blamed Obama for Benghazi, nobody at Fox blamed Obama for the plane, and nobody at Fox linked the 2 incidents together.


"NY gop lawmaker called Melissa Harris Perry a damn dirty ape"
This one twisted the facts in order to accuse a Republican candidate of racism, when that wasn't the case at all. The man used a line from "Planet of the apes" to voice his disagreement with something Harris-Perry had said in a promo. This was something he said to someone else, not to Harris-Perry... and come to find out, the man didn't even know who Harris-Perry was, much less the fact that she happens to be black. This was phony race card politics, pure and simple.


I find this kind of political dishonesty deplorable, low class, and a clear sign of someone who embraces phony beliefs that they've become desperate to try and legitimize.

It's like this... When a person has to resort to falsehoods, lies and distortion of the facts in order to prop up or bolster their political beliefs, then that person embraces a set of beliefs that aren't worth propping up in the first place... A person who possesses values, convictions and beliefs that are real, genuine, honest and heart felt, never has to resort to dishonesty in order to validate or prop them up, and there is no question or issue they can't honestly address...

Give that some thought.

Grim17
5/10/2014


http://www.debatepolitics.com/bias-media/193265-ny-gop-lawmaker-called-melissa-harris-perry-damn-dirty-ape-w-123-184-a.html
http://www.debatepolitics.com/bias-media/192910-fox-news-blames-benghazi-and-malaysia-flight-obama.html
[url]http://www.debatepolitics.com/bias-media/192802-sarah-palins-baptism-comment-go-unreported-fox-news-affiliates.html

http://www.debatepolitics.com/bias-...-wont-cover-wh-presser-if-benghazi-topic.html
http://www.debatepolitics.com/bias-...egon-senate-candidate-kicked-out-meeting.html
http://www.debatepolitics.com/bias-media/192463-ben-rhodes-email-foxs-new-false-benghazi-attack.html
[/URL]
 

rocket88

Mod Conspiracy Theorist
Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 7, 2011
Messages
44,814
Reaction score
20,220
Location
A very blue state
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
I have been astounded at the number of phony threads that have popped up in the "bias in the media" forum created purely to attack political adversaries.

POST DELETED

This is for comments on the topic, not for typical partisan insults and starting pissing wars.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

rocket88

Mod Conspiracy Theorist
Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 7, 2011
Messages
44,814
Reaction score
20,220
Location
A very blue state
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
It was a comment on the topic, but OK.
 
Joined
May 21, 2015
Messages
211
Reaction score
37
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
I see this constantly, on this and every other gun forum on the net.
 

John V

Well-known member
Joined
May 22, 2015
Messages
583
Reaction score
199
Location
China
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Very true, but not just in one thread, it’s now become a common way of debating.
‘Government plans to cut back welfare spending in 2015’ might become:

So you want to see people dying on the streets (distortion)
Why do you want to kill people (subjective)
False, it says on Wiki . . . (absence of knowledge)
When Regan was in power he . . . (distraction)

In my opinion, without third hand google or Wiki quotes, which is simply a repetition of what someone else thinks, a large majority of posts wouldn’t even exist. In a world of opinions, these are simply exaggerated in an attempt to turn someone else's opinions into the posters preference of 'facts'.
 
Top Bottom