Do you know your own self-interest?

[henry quirk]

Sure, Trump is a dick...doesn't change the fact the 'press' is slanted for Clinton and against Trump, just like the DNC was slanted for Clinton and against Bernie.

In both cases, organizations claim to be neutral and aren't.

Just judging 'em by their own standards, not mine.

[Terrapin Station]

I don't think there is any "neutral" and there can't be.

Even just having guidelines, views or opinions re what stories to cover, what to report, is a kind of bias.

Editing footage reflects biases--biases about what's important and what's not, how timing should work, etc.

Choosing words for stories reflects biases.

Etc.

[henry quirk]

I don't disagree...as I say: they foist up the standard, I just note their inability to hold to it.

And: sure bias marbles everything, but 'journalists' don't even try any more to walk a narrow line, not as reporters did, folks who weren't exactly neutral but certainly were fair.

[prof]

The main bias the corporate media has is to stir up conflict, and emphasize the 'horse-race' (thus managing to avoid discussing the most-urgent issues, the specifics about what would really help people) in order to make money!

They will criticize one of the candidates with a view to coercing that party to buy ad time on TV or radio in order to 'answer the charges against him/her - even though the criticism is over a phony or trivial issue [that does not matter all that much to the public.]

Virtually all the politicians have a 'pay to play' attitude toward real or potential donors. Exceptions, such as Bernie Sanders, or the late Paul Wellstone are rare indeed. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Wellstone
.

[Walker]

You and walker either don't understand /can't discern why or your too unethical to admit Trump is a dick.

With Trump
Think less loss
Not Shangri-la

Loss of what, you ask?
Truth, justice, and the American way.

[Arising_uk]

And: sure bias marbles everything, but 'journalists' don't even try any more to walk a narrow line, not as reporters did, folks who weren't exactly neutral but certainly were fair.

True, this is why 'churnalist' is a better name for the new breed.

[prof]

While Bill may be correct when he says that no one here will bother to click on a link and thus read as citation of evidence, here is such a link anyway: See

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/ne ... g-20110830

Scroll down that page of that Rolling Stone article to learn of voter suppression measures being taken by Republican Secretaries of State in various states of the U.S. to wipe thousands of voters off the voting rolls, dubbing them "inactive voters" because they failed to mail in a postcard, even though they have voted in every previous election. They have the same last name as someone in another state who voted; this is used as the excuse for giving them - if they show up and demand it- a provisional ballot, which they later won't count. [They may not be allowed by law to count these the same day. Yet they will announce the results on election night (excluding all the 'provisional' votes.)]

Anyone who votes for Trump, or who stays home and fails to vote against him, is not looking out for his (or her) self-interest

They will "repent at leisure" and express severe regrets if he ever becomes President

It will be too late then.

[henry quirk]

"Anyone who votes for Trump, or who stays home and fails to vote against him, is not looking out for his (or her) self-interest.

No, you betray your self-interest, your autonomy, when you view folks like Trump, Clinton, Johnson, etc. as anything other than potential employees, and when yiou let folks like them believe they're anything but potential employees.

You betray yourself when you look to another for direction, protection, or sustenance.

You betray what it means to be an adult human individual when you seek to be led.

Sure as shit: direct yourself or you will be directed.

[prof]

"Anyone who votes for Trump, or who stays home and fails to vote against him, is not looking out for his (or her) self-interest.

No, you betray your self-interest, your autonomy, when you view folks like Trump, .... as anything other than potential employees.

If he gets in, he'll soon let you know, rather emphatically, who is the Boss, and who is the subject of this new 'king.' Didn't he inform you, at the Convention, how he is the only one who can make things happen!Didn't he tell you at the end of his major acceptance speeech: ""I'll make you rich; I'll make you safe; I'll make you great again."

He wouldn't lie to you, would he?

[Walker]

Trump Dangerfield speaks.



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YlVDGmjz7eM

[Walker]

I'm not mad at you spheres...I just have nothing to add to your posts. Walker on the other hand I think is pulling my chain. There is no one on earth that can actually believe what he does and then use absurd arguments the way he does.

He must be joking. Cause usually people who hate Obama focus on the mistakes Obama has done. They don't show a video of usa policy that every American president has abided by an single out Obama as the only one who followed it. That's just crazy.

Most Republicans, though misguided and ignorant, can at least tell right from wrong...moral from immoral and make an argument based on that premise...as faulty and shallow as it usually is...at least their heart is in the right place. They just don't understand why what they do is immoral.

What's different about this new batch of Republicans, they don't care about right and wrong. They will make the argument, "right" IS "wrong".

There is no where to go with that. You can't argue with someone unless you both agree on the definition of right and wrong.

This new trump Republican, is not interested in what it means to be moral...so there is no argument to make. They just don't get it...they are the scariest sons a bitches alive. 72 virgins scary...

One wonders at these strange projections and imaginings. There are many labels for such thoughts, but really, it would be like analyzing the song of the wind chime.

*

Trumphobia:

Analysis?
Doesn’t take much.

Here’s what constitutes Trumphobia.

When a Democrat says what Trump says, no problem.
When Trump says what Trump says, problem.

It’s just as plain as plain can be.
Nothin fancy about what’s going on.

Bill Clinton talking like Trump on immigration
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FZXbG5gvoC0

What was that...20 years ago? LOL

Let's see...how did Clinton's plan work out? Did it stop the illegal immigration problem? LOL

Oh but wait! He didn't build a wall! Well, shit...that there's probably the problem! No wall!

Well, when we finally build a wall, round up all the illegal immigrants, feed them and house them while we organize transportation, put them on buses, ship em back, man the wall, air, and ocean. We might lessen the problem at a cost that greatly exceeds the current problem of having them here. LOL

Or

Maybe we grant amnesty, give them citizenship and let them start paying taxes like every other citizen.

Or is that too humane for you?

There are not many countries in the world where people want to illegally enter. The risks outweigh the advantages.

Not so for the US of A.

The branch of U.S. government that represents the people made the immigration laws.

Another branch of government failed to enforce those laws. A large underclass of illegal, uneducated immigrants is the new slave labor for their superiors such as the Clintons. And, the illegals who gave the finger to their host country phone home to stay in touch, and they pay the inflated wireless rates jacked up by Carlos Slim to take corporate advantage of his countrymens' homesickness, benefiting his interests and all who benefit from his interests.

The Republican Party ended slavery.
The Democratic Party is the party of slavery and the KKK.
Today, black Americans are a solid Democratic voting block.
Have you completed your research to find the facts on how, why and when this happened?
Or, is moronic, simplistic, and childish party-line propaganda more comfortable.

[henry quirk]

" He wouldn't lie to you, would he?"

Of course he would, and probably will...so will she...so will all others.

[FlashDangerpants]

The Republican Party ended slavery.
The Democratic Party is the party of slavery and the KKK.
Today, black Americans are a solid Democratic voting block.
Have you completed your research to find the facts on how, why and when this happened?
Or, is moronic, simplistic, and childish party-line propaganda more comfortable.

It ended when the Democratic party started turfing out their racists in the late 50s and 60s, culminating with Lyndon Johnson signing the Civil Rights Acts of 64 and 68 as well as the Voting Rights Act of 65.
The Republicans responded by nominating Barry Goldwater for the 64 presidential campaign (he was annihilated outside the deep south) and then adopting the Southern Strategy for the next few elections, which brought them white racist votes in the areas where the Dems had discarded their racists.

Both sides of the civil war were racists and both parties were racist after it. Futhermore all political parties contain a coalition of interests. In the case of Dems and Reps, each had a rump of racists in the deep south contending with more moderate interests from the north east and the west coasts. In the Dems' case, those southern racists lost the argument and wandered off. The Republicans sadly saw this as an opportunity and recruited those disaffected southern democrats.

I donate these facts willingly to artisticsolution.

[Terrapin Station]

Anyone who votes for Trump, or who stays home and fails to vote against him, is not looking out for his (or her) self-interest.

I won't be voting, but If I were voting, I'd vote for Trump this election.

Normally I vote for either Libertarian or Green candidates, but I don't like Hillary at all, I think that it would be worth seeing what someone like Trump who isn't a career politician and who isn't going to just mindlessly follow career politician conventions would do in office, and I like Trump's tendency to unapologetically speak his mind.

[artisticsolution]

The Republican Party ended slavery.
The Democratic Party is the party of slavery and the KKK.
Today, black Americans are a solid Democratic voting block.
Have you completed your research to find the facts on how, why and when this happened?
Or, is moronic, simplistic, and childish party-line propaganda more comfortable.

It ended when the Democratic party started turfing out their racists in the late 50s and 60s, culminating with Lyndon Johnson signing the Civil Rights Acts of 64 and 68 as well as the Voting Rights Act of 65.
The Republicans responded by nominating Barry Goldwater for the 64 presidential campaign (he was annihilated outside the deep south) and then adopting the Southern Strategy for the next few elections, which brought them white racist votes in the areas where the Dems had discarded their racists.

Both sides of the civil war were racists and both parties were racist after it. Futhermore all political parties contain a coalition of interests. In the case of Dems and Reps, each had a rump of racists in the deep south contending with more moderate interests from the north east and the west coasts. In the Dems' case, those southern racists lost the argument and wandered off. The Republicans sadly saw this as an opportunity and recruited those disaffected southern democrats.

I donate these facts willingly to artisticsolution.

Thanks Flash.

Just goes to show you how much things change.

I would have voted for the Republican Abraham Lincoln...would you have Walker?

I am for equal rights for everyone... are you Walker?

This is the difference is see between Republicans now vs. Then.

You are proud of your Republican past, walker...but do you understand why? That is the important question.

This new Republican is so far away from those ideals, it's not even funny.