Why it is important to doubt the gatekeepers....

I just found that Elon Musk is President from duck duck go.
 
Papers don't make money from subscribers. They make money from advertisers. Advertisers don't care if the paper is accurate or not. They just care about how many eyeballs they can reach. If you want to understand media bias, you need to understand the incentives at work. It doesn't matter how much a newspaper lies if they have a large-enough audience that LIKES being lied to.

That's the Fox News business model.

Since I'm on a roll, this also explains why media owners are so bullish on LLMs. Paying writers is expensive. It's even more expensive to pay good writers to get things right. If you use AI to spit out page after page of inaccurate slop with intriguing headlines, you can still sell ads to monetize the people who click through.

Eventually people will get wise and stop clicking through, but modern vulture capitalists consider brands disposable. Take a brand people trust, get rich quick by enshittifying it, then abandon the husk and move on to the next target.

This ^ is truth.

Full stop.

👍

👏

🏆

🇺🇸

I would only add:

What is truly ironic, (when one considers the OP) is that it’s the news organization that JaySecretions, etc, feels are the MOST biased ("left" leaning) that are ACTUALLY the ones trying to maintain some standard of truth telling and journalistic independence in spite of their corporate overlord’s pressure to generate clicks.

And, even more ironically, when news organizations that were once bastions of truth telling , integrity, and journalistic independence DO start losing their credibility due to injecting bias into their reporting, it is ALMOST ALWAYS because they are trying to attract right wing eyeballs, so they skew their reporting and opinion pieces to favor the right.

🤬

JFC

SAD!!!
 
Careful friend. You are implying that the Ukrainian leadership may not be the good guys. Google says they are and their gods.... I mean media elite experts says they are. It's not "Thus says the Lord" for them, it's "Thus saith Google". You might invite their wrath. They might *whispers* cancel you!
BeowulfAR is a Russian bot, working for Putin. Engaging with him is pointless. We get these on this forum from time to time, trying to sway things in Russia's favor. It doesn't work.
 
As for my privilege, I work at a mom and pop chain of sandwich shops, making $12 an hour as manager. I love it. I get to have a platform to help people who need a job and a second chance. But I live paycheck to paycheck, live in a small apartment, and can't even afford a car.

I know what I speak of, because shit rolls downhill, and I get hit with most of it in my trying to survive.
I wanna speak to this a second or two.
During the financial crisis of '07 polls showed Americans across all political views had had enough of corporate greed. I've told you before that I am a better person than you and a better non practicing Christian as well and this is but another example. No one deserves to work in a sandwich shop or even shoveling manure for 12 bucks an hour. That was maybe practical back in '85 but not 2024. You should be earning more. I want you to be earning more. Conservatives and liberals once agreed on this as we watched banks declare that they were too big to fail. Yet, when the time came to bailout American families from the pandemic the conservatives you support yelled too much and convinced you that you and your suffering neighbors were getting for your tax dollars welfare entitlements. I don't know you and vote more for your interests than you do as you support those who refuse to raise the minimum wage to even 1980's inflationary standards.

Mexico did not pay for the wall. The bastard shut down the government and then diverted military funds, not from weapons, but from base housing and families, to then build the tiny percentage of wall he managed to build.

Obama was born in Hawaii. It's not a trick question nor debatable. It's fact.

Harris was never appointed Border Czar by the Biden administration.

For a person here telling others about bias in media and to be wary of falsehoods, sheez, you sure do get confused on things that have been tested and verified. My examples are/were better than checking the allegations of Tara Reade. GFY
 
Lol, he’s not saying anything like you’re claiming whatsoever, you’re projecting what you think he means through your own echo chamber filter. He’s been telling everyone exactly what he plans to do but he’s done a Jedi mind trick on y’all so you think he’s a patriot and has your best interest in mind. You probably also believe he has no idea what project 2025 is and that he also disagrees with some of it.
He has openly blasted Project 2025 as extreme and dangerous. When your side says "We aren't racist, we are the party of the people, and if you like your doctor you get to keep your doc.... [Okay, poking the bear a bit with uncomfortable facts on that one, but it makes the point]", we are expected to take them at face value. When our side openly repudiates Project 2025, the natural response is, "Yeah, but they didn't MEAN it!" Yeah, y'all are fair minded as hell. Then again that's been your refrain for decades. "That isn't what they meant!" Then you scare gullible people into voting for you. Then, come to find out, all of your hyperbolic scary talk ends up being one grand fairytale. Your party could be the party of the Brothers Grimm.... And a bonus, the world of the Brothers Grimm paved the way for a nationalistic socialism that was the Nazi party.... Kinda like what many of your crowd embraces. Maybe Google it or ask Alexa if you don't understand the references.... If, that is, the information passes the filter of your Ministry of Truth.
 
This ^ is truth.

Full stop.

👍

👏

🏆

🇺🇸

I would only add:

What is truly ironic, (when one considers the OP) is that it’s the news organization that JaySecretions, etc, feels are the MOST biased ("left" leaning) that are ACTUALLY the ones trying to maintain some standard of truth telling and journalistic independence in spite of their corporate overlord’s pressure to generate clicks.

And, even more ironically, when news organizations that were once bastions of truth telling , integrity, and journalistic independence DO start losing their credibility due to injecting bias into their reporting, it is ALMOST ALWAYS because they are trying to attract right wing eyeballs, so they skew their reporting and opinion pieces to favor the right.

🤬

JFC

SAD!!!
List for me all the times... Okay the Number of times and nature of them, where Scopes calls out libs as liars, and the same where they call out conservatives (notice that I didn't say Dems and Republicans) and compare. If they are balanced, it will be similar in both numbers and severity. And it won't shift to extreme levels based on who is the majority party and whether or not they like the party in power. Did Snopes call out Obama as much as Trump? Did Snopes call out MSNBC and CNN as much as FOX and NewsMax? If not, they have a bias. The gap will tell you how extreme.
 
BeowulfAR is a Russian bot, working for Putin. Engaging with him is pointless. We get these on this forum from time to time, trying to sway things in Russia's favor. It doesn't work.
Lol... I have a friend who is a Russia sympathizer (not BOTH sides are bad guys, we should stay the hell out of all of it because we have more pressing issues at home-my position-, but Russia is great, Ukraine is the bad guy-which is absolutely nuts), and, by the way, slightly anti-semitic. He drives me nuts. He would be labeled a Russian boy on here. He is in fact just an idiot on these subjects.
 
He has openly blasted Project 2025 as extreme and dangerous.
Yes and no. What he has said is both that he knows nothing about it whatsoever, and that he opposes some parts of it. As even you can figure out, those cannot both be true - if he doesn't know anything about it, he has no way of knowing whether or not he opposes any part of it, never mind specific parts.
When your side says "We aren't racist, we are the party of the people, and if you like your doctor you get to keep your doc.... [Okay, poking the bear a bit with uncomfortable facts on that one, but it makes the point]", we are expected to take them at face value.
No you're not. You're expected to look at the facts and determine if they are on our side, which most of the time (including the ones you refer to here), they are.
When our side openly repudiates Project 2025, the natural response is, "Yeah, but they didn't MEAN it!" Yeah, y'all are fair minded as hell.
It is only "fair minded" to acknowledge that Donald Trump has a very long history of lying about nearly everything, and that the folks behind Project 2025 include at least 140 people who have worked for him. So yes, the natural response is indeed that he probably didn't mean it - especially when even his denial is inconsistent as I noted above.

Mind you, when Donald Trump claims ignorance, he's always got a believer in me. But that's beside the point.

Then again that's been your refrain for decades. "That isn't what they meant!"
That's because that's been the Republicans' playbook for decades. It's called the Southern Strategy, and it's all about implying your message rather than stating it outright, so that then they can claim they "didn't say that", when for all intents and purposes, they effectively did.
Maybe Google it or ask Alexa if you don't understand the references.... If, that is, the information passes the filter of your Ministry of Truth.
It sure as heck won't pass yours. We all know that.
 
I wanna speak to this a second or two.
During the financial crisis of '07 polls showed Americans across all political views had had enough of corporate greed. I've told you before that I am a better person than you and a better non practicing Christian as well and this is but another example. No one deserves to work in a sandwich shop or even shoveling manure for 12 bucks an hour. That was maybe practical back in '85 but not 2024. You should be earning more. I want you to be earning more. Conservatives and liberals once agreed on this as we watched banks declare that they were too big to fail. Yet, when the time came to bailout American families from the pandemic the conservatives you support yelled too much and convinced you that you and your suffering neighbors were getting for your tax dollars welfare entitlements. I don't know you and vote more for your interests than you do as you support those who refuse to raise the minimum wage to even 1980's inflationary standards.
The push to raise the minimum wage and the union power raising wages not matched to the market CAUSED the inflation. Anything that is not market driven in a free market economy is a bad idea. And many of the small mom and pops have to pay this way while only the big corporations you claim to hate can match the higher wages. Your side is who has broken the system.
Mexico did not pay for the wall. The bastard shut down the government and then diverted military funds, not from weapons, but from base housing and families, to then build the tiny percentage of wall he managed to build.
False
Obama was born in Hawaii. It's not a trick question nor debatable. It's fact.
False as far as whether it is questionable.
Harris was never appointed Border Czar by the Biden administration.
False
For a person here telling others about bias in media and to be wary of falsehoods, sheez, you sure do get confused on things that have been tested and verified. My examples are/were better than checking the allegations of Tara Reade. GFY
The only ones who still believe your positions are the idiots watching CNN, PBS, and MSNBC.
 
List for me all the times... Okay the Number of times and nature of them, where Scopes calls out libs as liars, and the same where they call out conservatives (notice that I didn't say Dems and Republicans) and compare.
I'll assume you mean "Snopes" rather than "Scopes". Just off the top of my head, they have debunked claims that George W.M.D. Bush...
  • waved at Stevie Wonder,
  • said there was no French word for "entrepreneur", or
  • held a book upside down while reading it to children.
  • They also marked the rumor that his father was amazed by a plain old grocery store scanner "false".
They've also debunked claims that
  • Dan Quayle thought Latin Americans spoke Latin
  • Rates of wife-beating skyrocket on Super Bowl days (there actually is evidence they increase somewhat, incidentally)
  • Col. Sanders of Kentucky Fried Chicken fame was a Klan member
  • A rather distasteful photo of Sarah Palin in a bikini was real (it was photoshopped)
  • Palin said she could see Russia from her house
  • Trump called Nazis and racists "very fine people" (I disagree with their interpretation, but that's beside the point)
  • Vance and the couch
And that's just from memory. I am sure there are more.
If they are balanced, it will be similar in both numbers and severity.
Not necessarily. If Snopes or any other resource seems to have more examples of lies from the right than from the left, that probably just means there really are more lies coming from the right than from the left.
And it won't shift to extreme levels based on who is the majority party and whether or not they like the party in power.
It will if that party is dominated by extremists, which the Republicans have been for quite some time now.
Did Snopes call out Obama as much as Trump?
Did Obama lie as much as Trump? No. Did anyone lie as much as Trump? Probably not.
Did Snopes call out MSNBC and CNN as much as FOX and NewsMax? If not, they have a bias.
Or FOX and Newsmax have a bias. You're also neglecting to account for times a network acknowledges later on that they made a mistake, something the right-wing networks you mention make a point of never doing.
 
I called only one of them racist and I gave a detailed reasoning.

I have never expressly told my race or gender here. But if you must know, I consider myself troll for both.

They do you a disservice by not being completely transparent with you. Many black folks do that because experience has shown that the least connected and poorest of whites have the power to still do harm (see Tulsa race riots).

I feel for you. But only slightly. The Christianity that I practiced taught me to be kind and appreciative, and to love the downtrodden and least among us. You are a conservative who considers themselves a Christian first and you come here and preach the words of blasphemy.


Stop supporting shit conservative values. Be more like Jesus.
So, I first want to apologize. As I read my own response to this, I realized I am as guilty in my response to you of assuming your story as I have been irritated at your side for doing to myself and others. I have no right to expect you to act without personal assumptions about others, only to do the same to you. You very well may have studied the Bible extensively. You may have simply spent your time in a denomination that focused less on the Bible in context and more on social contextualization and such. You may have not, and simply been REALLY burned by those who are more fundamental in their reading of the Bible. In short, I don’t know your story and had no right to assume. I genuinely apologize.



Second, then, I want to give the benefit of the doubt and give a full answer to the heart of your challenge. I want to make clear where I stand on these issues once and for all.



I have major issues, as I am sure you do, with those who would try to say America was ever a Christian nation. There has only been one legit Theocracy in the history of the world. Israel. And that went sour very quickly because they refused to follow what they said they believed and were. Yes, there were a LOT of Christians involved in our founding and founding institutions, but they were flawed men and, and there were some Deists among them (though not nearly as many as the left would claim, as can be attested by their own writings), and even a few agnostics. The idea that we should make everyone function as Christians in America now is a problem. I took issue with that with thew “Moral Majority”, and I take issue with that in its reemergence in Project 2025. (The very content of that, by the way, is why I don’t believe for a second that a man of the questionable moral fiber of Donald Trump would ever support it. Please take note of how I just described him.)



That being said, a few points. First, I don’t object to charity and helping the poor. That has, in fact, been a central part of my life for its entirety. But it’s a question of whose role it is. Charity and helping the poor is a blessed and voluntary function of the PRIVATE SECTOR. Individuals. Non-profs. Churches. Para-church orgs. They are best equipped to handle this, do it well and smoothly, and are, in fact the ones the Bible assigns that role to. Even in the Old Testament. If a man or woman stole because he was hiungry, the Government was to fine him or her and they had to pay back double. On the other hand, the individual was to leave enough in the field for the poor to go and do the work of harvesting the gleanings for themselves so they would not go hungry. The entire Book of Ruth is told around this. (By the way, this is why I fully support a system that has those on welfare HAVING to do some kind of actual work in the community, and having to look for a job actively, if we have any welfare at all.) The government’s role is not to feed the people. It is to defend them, protect them from criminals, to protect borders, to take the life of those who murder others, and to leave people free to act in a moral way. That’s it. I could cite several passages, but you probably aren’t that interested. I would just remind you that Jesus Himself said that the government had a legit right to capital punishment, that Paul and Peter said the same thing, and that even the Church in Acts, when taking up collections to help those in need within their own community (not primarily those outside of it with these funds and resources) had no requirement that people sell or give everything, and had no stipulation against individual wealth, capitalistic profit, or private property ownership. In fact, all this was encouraged as a blessing from God as well. People gave OF THEIR OWN FREE WILL AS THEY WERE ABLE AND FELT LED.

Second, there is actual Biblical basis for the conservative position on the border. When Israel was headed to the promised land, there were a few nations along the way that got nervous about this big group of people headed their way. When Moses asked for passage through, promising to stick to the highways, to touch as little as possible, and to pay for what they ate, a few flatly told him NO. They were not told by God to go through anyway. The nations weren’t even judged for it. They were told by God, “It’s not your land. I didn’t give that to you. Respect their wishes. Respect their borders. Go around the long way. Stay above reproach.” The people had no right to demand entry into a land that did not belong to them. (We are NOT getting into the Promised Land debate here. I’m just making a point.) The Bible actually says the God establishes the borders of nations. Any nation has a right, even a duty, to protect its borders, its citizens, and its resources. It even has the right to lock them down to keep people they don’t want or can’t afford to have out. A strong border policy is actually pretty biblical.



Finally, I don’t follow the cult of personality. I hated it when your side did it with Obama. I hate it when my side does it with Trump. No man today is Messiah. No man should be treated as such. I do not ignore his legit flaws. I do not justify it when he legitimately is doing or saying something off. Again, I won’t debate the merits of the legal attacks on him because we are not going to agree, so it will be a waste of time. Suffice it to say, I believe about all of them to be petty at best, fallacious at worst.



But there are fundamental things I look for in a candidate. Are they Pro-life and Anti-abortion, and where are they on that spectrum? If they openly support the murder of babies in the womb (NOT debating that here- it’s not the point) I will never support them. If they have no regard for the concept that freedom is a gift from God, not a privilege given by government, I will never support them. If they replace freedom of religion with freedom of worship (study the history here) I will never support them. If they hold the idea that the Constitution is a “Living, evolving document”, an idea put forth by a radical leftist of his time, I will not support them. If they do not passionately, deeply love this country as it was founded to be, I will not support them. If they divide people by ethnicity, skin color, orientation, ect, and look for intersectional places where they can create a victim class, I won’t support them. If they believe that children belong to the community and schools, and not to the parents, I will not support them. If they believe that teachers know more about what kids should be taught, learn, or believe than the parents, I will never support them. If they support the racist ideology of the 1619 Project, BLM, or CRT, I will never support them. If they believe the state should be able to dictate to the churches and private citizens what they can or cannot preach and say, I will not support them. If they don’t respect the Flag, honor the troops, and hold basic values on a public level, I will not support them. There is an absolute standard in place here and I don’t shift when it is inconvenient.



Is Trump an upright, moral man? Nope. Do I take issue with some of his positions? Yep. But there is ONE person on the ballot that most closely aligns with my beliefs and views, and it ain’t Kamala. The standard of moral purity in the Whitehouse ended with the Kenedy’s, was totally obliterated by the Clintons, and probably was done away with in several other administrations behind closed doors, Dem and Rep. To demand that now of Trump is just hypocritical. I don’t like him as a man, but I do understand him. And unless you can get Tim Scott up there as the candidate, I have only one legit choice if I am going to vote my conscience. It’s not about following or worshiping a man. It’s about abiding by principles that were in place long before he came on the scene.



I hope this clears up any confusion you may have about me and my positions.
 
What Google should show is exactly what the person looking for information is clearly asking for in the search. Again, by way of example, I put in "Conservative Resources" and got a list of environmentalist agencies for conservation. I have no history of looking for such things and the search history context was clearly that of seeking Conservative political resources. I typed in "Democrat Resources" and got page after page of links to Democrat resource sites.

Google, Yahoo, all of them have one job: to function as a giant warehouse of information, an online encyclopedia. Their job is not to vet the quality, source, or value of the information. That is the reader's job. When the tech companies do that, they are no longer acting as information warehouses, they are acting as thought gatekeepers. They are telling people, by what they allow access to, what to think and believe. And THAT is the fundamental problem. The elite now believe they have that right, because they think they know better than the little people they lord over.

Your side is proving it's love of tyranny and tyrants. You don't want freedom. You want people to be easy to control.

JFC!

Did it ever occur to you what the definition of the word “conservative” is?

Compare that to the word “democrat”.

“Democrat” refers only to a specific political party while “conservative” has several different meanings and is not specific only to politics.

The political antithesis to “democrat” in the contemporary US is “republican”, not “conservative.”

FFS!🤦

The opposite of “conservative” is “liberal”. Do yourself a favor and Google “liberal resources”. Now compare the results. ✅


Now Google “Republican resources”. That’s what you’re looking for, no?


Now STFU about search engine bias you stupid ass. You need to ask the right questions to get the right answers.

And go fuck your dumb ass projection bullshit:

Your side is proving it's love of tyranny and tyrants. You don't want freedom. You want people to be easy to control.

Fuck you, you little tyrant moron. You are voting for a narcissist who has thrown everyone under the bus who hasn’t pledged and proven their allegiance to him. Trump only gives lip service to the constitution and Christianity because it garners votes. I’d bet anything he couldn’t recite the preamble of the constitution or the Lord’s Prayer.


(BTW, if you’d like to have a more respectful and civil discussion feel free to drop the bullshit accusations and generalizations of saying “your side…”.. I engaged your argument with real and sincere conversation and you returned whiny insults. Fuck you.)
 
Last edited:
The standard of moral purity in the Whitehouse ended with the Kenedy’s, was totally obliterated by the Clintons, and probably was done away with in several other administrations behind closed doors, Dem and Rep. To demand that now of Trump is just hypocritical.

🙄

False equivalencies of epic proportions.

Rationalizations of epic proportions.

FAIL of epic proportions.

😑

👉 JaySecretions 🤣

🇺🇸
 
He has openly blasted Project 2025 as extreme and dangerous.
Link your receipts on this because he’s lied about knowing about it as evidenced by his comment he knows nothing about it at all yet disagrees with some of it.

When your side says "We aren't racist, we are the party of the people, and if you like your doctor you get to keep your doc.... [Okay, poking the bear a bit with uncomfortable facts on that one, but it makes the point]", we are expected to take them at face value.
If you say so, but why would either side.

When our side openly repudiates Project 2025,
Again, bring the receipts. From all things I’ve seen project 2025 is the plan if trump wins.

the natural response is, "Yeah, but they didn't MEAN it!" Yeah, y'all are fair minded as hell. Then again that's been your refrain for decades. "That isn't what they meant!"
Wasn’t it the MAGAfolk who’d go trump didn’t say that, he meant xyz, and if he did say it blah blah blah, excusing and misinterpreting and misconstruing his comments to make them more sane and palatable.

Then you scare gullible people into voting for you.
Woof. Fearmongering is what trump is all about. And revenge and retribution. And authoritarian regimes.

Then, come to find out, all of your hyperbolic scary talk ends up being one grand fairytale. Your party could be the party of the Brothers Grimm.... And a bonus, the world of the Brothers Grimm paved the way for a nationalistic socialism that was the Nazi party.... Kinda like what many of your crowd embraces. Maybe Google it or ask Alexa if you don't understand the references.... If, that is, the information passes the filter of your Ministry of Truth.
Well, if trump wins your authoritarian fairytale begins.

Yes and no. What he has said is both that he knows nothing about it whatsoever, and that he opposes some parts of it. As even you can figure out, those cannot both be true - if he doesn't know anything about it, he has no way of knowing whether or not he opposes any part of it, never mind specific parts.

No you're not. You're expected to look at the facts and determine if they are on our side, which most of the time (including the ones you refer to here), they are.

It is only "fair minded" to acknowledge that Donald Trump has a very long history of lying about nearly everything, and that the folks behind Project 2025 include at least 140 people who have worked for him. So yes, the natural response is indeed that he probably didn't mean it - especially when even his denial is inconsistent as I noted above.

Mind you, when Donald Trump claims ignorance, he's always got a believer in me. But that's beside the point.


That's because that's been the Republicans' playbook for decades. It's called the Southern Strategy, and it's all about implying your message rather than stating it outright, so that then they can claim they "didn't say that", when for all intents and purposes, they effectively did.

It sure as heck won't pass yours. We all know that.
Thanks. You beat me to it so I took a bit of a different tack.
 
Last edited:
Link your receipts on this because he’s lied about knowing about it as evidenced by his comment he knows nothing about it at all yet disagrees with some of it.


If you say so, but why would either side.


Again, bring the receipts. From all things I’ve seen project 2025 is the plan if trump wins.


Wasn’t it the MAGAfolk who’d go trump didn’t say that, he meant xyz, and if he did say it blah blah blah, excusing and misinterpreting and misconstruing his comments to make them more sane and palatable.


Woof. Fearmongering is what trump is all about. And revenge and retribution. And authoritarian regimes.


Well, if trump wins your authoritarian fairytale begins.


Thanks. You beat me to it so I took a bit of a different tack.

And the best JaySecretions can do to paint the Democrats as “just as bad” is to point to President Obama’s lack of clarity about the ACA and the realities of the health insurance market related to scam policies that didn’t really cover much.

😑

And now the ACA is widely seen as a landmark piece of legislation that has kept millions of people alive, in their homes, and out of bankruptcy.

JaySecretions just can’t win.

😑
 
So, I first want to apologize. As I read my own response to this, I realized I am as guilty in my response to you of assuming your story as I have been irritated at your side for doing to myself and others. I have no right to expect you to act without personal assumptions about others, only to do the same to you. You very well may have studied the Bible extensively. You may have simply spent your time in a denomination that focused less on the Bible in context and more on social contextualization and such. You may have not, and simply been REALLY burned by those who are more fundamental in their reading of the Bible. In short, I don’t know your story and had no right to assume. I genuinely apologize.



Second, then, I want to give the benefit of the doubt and give a full answer to the heart of your challenge. I want to make clear where I stand on these issues once and for all.



I have major issues, as I am sure you do, with those who would try to say America was ever a Christian nation. There has only been one legit Theocracy in the history of the world. Israel. And that went sour very quickly because they refused to follow what they said they believed and were. Yes, there were a LOT of Christians involved in our founding and founding institutions, but they were flawed men and, and there were some Deists among them (though not nearly as many as the left would claim, as can be attested by their own writings), and even a few agnostics. The idea that we should make everyone function as Christians in America now is a problem. I took issue with that with thew “Moral Majority”, and I take issue with that in its reemergence in Project 2025. (The very content of that, by the way, is why I don’t believe for a second that a man of the questionable moral fiber of Donald Trump would ever support it. Please take note of how I just described him.)



That being said, a few points. First, I don’t object to charity and helping the poor. That has, in fact, been a central part of my life for its entirety. But it’s a question of whose role it is. Charity and helping the poor is a blessed and voluntary function of the PRIVATE SECTOR. Individuals. Non-profs. Churches. Para-church orgs. They are best equipped to handle this, do it well and smoothly, and are, in fact the ones the Bible assigns that role to. Even in the Old Testament. If a man or woman stole because he was hiungry, the Government was to fine him or her and they had to pay back double. On the other hand, the individual was to leave enough in the field for the poor to go and do the work of harvesting the gleanings for themselves so they would not go hungry. The entire Book of Ruth is told around this. (By the way, this is why I fully support a system that has those on welfare HAVING to do some kind of actual work in the community, and having to look for a job actively, if we have any welfare at all.) The government’s role is not to feed the people. It is to defend them, protect them from criminals, to protect borders, to take the life of those who murder others, and to leave people free to act in a moral way. That’s it. I could cite several passages, but you probably aren’t that interested. I would just remind you that Jesus Himself said that the government had a legit right to capital punishment, that Paul and Peter said the same thing, and that even the Church in Acts, when taking up collections to help those in need within their own community (not primarily those outside of it with these funds and resources) had no requirement that people sell or give everything, and had no stipulation against individual wealth, capitalistic profit, or private property ownership. In fact, all this was encouraged as a blessing from God as well. People gave OF THEIR OWN FREE WILL AS THEY WERE ABLE AND FELT LED.

Second, there is actual Biblical basis for the conservative position on the border. When Israel was headed to the promised land, there were a few nations along the way that got nervous about this big group of people headed their way. When Moses asked for passage through, promising to stick to the highways, to touch as little as possible, and to pay for what they ate, a few flatly told him NO. They were not told by God to go through anyway. The nations weren’t even judged for it. They were told by God, “It’s not your land. I didn’t give that to you. Respect their wishes. Respect their borders. Go around the long way. Stay above reproach.” The people had no right to demand entry into a land that did not belong to them. (We are NOT getting into the Promised Land debate here. I’m just making a point.) The Bible actually says the God establishes the borders of nations. Any nation has a right, even a duty, to protect its borders, its citizens, and its resources. It even has the right to lock them down to keep people they don’t want or can’t afford to have out. A strong border policy is actually pretty biblical.



Finally, I don’t follow the cult of personality. I hated it when your side did it with Obama. I hate it when my side does it with Trump. No man today is Messiah. No man should be treated as such. I do not ignore his legit flaws. I do not justify it when he legitimately is doing or saying something off. Again, I won’t debate the merits of the legal attacks on him because we are not going to agree, so it will be a waste of time. Suffice it to say, I believe about all of them to be petty at best, fallacious at worst.



But there are fundamental things I look for in a candidate. Are they Pro-life and Anti-abortion, and where are they on that spectrum? If they openly support the murder of babies in the womb (NOT debating that here- it’s not the point) I will never support them. If they have no regard for the concept that freedom is a gift from God, not a privilege given by government, I will never support them. If they replace freedom of religion with freedom of worship (study the history here) I will never support them. If they hold the idea that the Constitution is a “Living, evolving document”, an idea put forth by a radical leftist of his time, I will not support them. If they do not passionately, deeply love this country as it was founded to be, I will not support them. If they divide people by ethnicity, skin color, orientation, ect, and look for intersectional places where they can create a victim class, I won’t support them. If they believe that children belong to the community and schools, and not to the parents, I will not support them. If they believe that teachers know more about what kids should be taught, learn, or believe than the parents, I will never support them. If they support the racist ideology of the 1619 Project, BLM, or CRT, I will never support them. If they believe the state should be able to dictate to the churches and private citizens what they can or cannot preach and say, I will not support them. If they don’t respect the Flag, honor the troops, and hold basic values on a public level, I will not support them. There is an absolute standard in place here and I don’t shift when it is inconvenient.



Is Trump an upright, moral man? Nope. Do I take issue with some of his positions? Yep. But there is ONE person on the ballot that most closely aligns with my beliefs and views, and it ain’t Kamala. The standard of moral purity in the Whitehouse ended with the Kenedy’s, was totally obliterated by the Clintons, and probably was done away with in several other administrations behind closed doors, Dem and Rep. To demand that now of Trump is just hypocritical. I don’t like him as a man, but I do understand him. And unless you can get Tim Scott up there as the candidate, I have only one legit choice if I am going to vote my conscience. It’s not about following or worshiping a man. It’s about abiding by principles that were in place long before he came on the scene.



I hope this clears up any confusion you may have about me and my positions.
Oof. Lots of words to say your a card carrying MAGAt. Actually, you sound more like a Russian bot like the others who have preached the church of trump here. You’re very busy, btw, I hope you’re fairly compensated.
 
I'll assume you mean "Snopes" rather than "Scopes". Just off the top of my head, they have debunked claims that George W.M.D. Bush...
  • waved at Stevie Wonder,
  • said there was no French word for "entrepreneur", or
  • held a book upside down while reading it to children.
  • They also marked the rumor that his father was amazed by a plain old grocery store scanner "false".
They've also debunked claims that
  • Dan Quayle thought Latin Americans spoke Latin
  • Rates of wife-beating skyrocket on Super Bowl days (there actually is evidence they increase somewhat, incidentally)
  • Col. Sanders of Kentucky Fried Chicken fame was a Klan member
  • A rather distasteful photo of Sarah Palin in a bikini was real (it was photoshopped)
  • Palin said she could see Russia from her house
  • Trump called Nazis and racists "very fine people" (I disagree with their interpretation, but that's beside the point)
  • Vance and the couch
And that's just from memory. I am sure there are more.

Not necessarily. If Snopes or any other resource seems to have more examples of lies from the right than from the left, that probably just means there really are more lies coming from the right than from the left.

It will if that party is dominated by extremists, which the Republicans have been for quite some time now.

Did Obama lie as much as Trump? No. Did anyone lie as much as Trump? Probably not.

Or FOX and Newsmax have a bias. You're also neglecting to account for times a network acknowledges later on that they made a mistake, something the right-wing networks you mention make a point of never doing.


You know, THE MOST INTERESTING THING about all of those fact checks isn't that they're false, it's that someone just like you turds made those claims in the first place.

You hate. You hate so much you have to make up reasons to hate someone because rationally there's no basis for having that much hate inside a person.

You know it too. Just like when you turds said that Trump wore his pants on backwards there wasn't any reason to even mention that, let alone make up a lie about it.

But you turds did it anyway. Because hate.

THAT is who you are.
 
You know, THE MOST INTERESTING THING about all of those fact checks isn't that they're false, it's that someone just like you turds made those claims in the first place.

You hate. You hate so much you have to make up reasons to hate someone because rationally there's no basis for having that much hate inside a person.

You know it too. Just like when you turds said that Trump wore his pants on backwards there wasn't any reason to even mention that, let alone make up a lie about it.

But you turds did it anyway. Because hate.

THAT is who you are.

You’re a fucking moron. You’ve proved it over and over, either that or you’re simply a liar.

Fact checking checks facts. They review information and compare it to evidence. They review sources of news and report their track records. They reveal liars and the lies they tell.

No wonder you think they hate liars and cons like you.
 
Last edited:
So, I first want to apologize.
Apology accepted. TY. I think this was a good faith effort and I will try try to not to curse at you though reserving the right to do so at some of your very frustrating statements.

As I read my own response to this, I realized I am as guilty in my response to you of assuming your story as I have been irritated at your side for doing to myself and others.
You should work on this. Seriously. I’m frustrated by lies and misinformation. I think we all need to step out our bubble. MSNBC and Fox are businesses. They seek profit. I approach both with skepticism. I do though have a higher bar of verification for one over the other. I think what you’re not stepping back to see that’s similar between the likes of MSNBC and CNN and this site is that they’re filled with democrats arguing with and against each other. The left leaning members are constantly pushing back on each other here. I’m far from saying it’s appealing at times but, it’s actually a strength that keeps this side, imho, more grounded. The right leaning members rarely correct each other’s opinions that are not factual so when the left ultimately attacks the falsehood it can seem like a personal attack against you or RW media.
I have no right to expect you to act without personal assumptions about others, only to do the same to you. You very well may have studied the Bible extensively. You may have simply spent your time in a denomination that focused less on the Bible…

Meh. The Bible actually means very little to me anymore. I read it and study it as, again, a means to step out my bubble and correct and beat Christians up with their own words. It, and other religious texts, are filled with ambiguities. When I encounter one in text or in life I try to defer towards love rather than the wrath of a god.

Second, then, I want to give the benefit of the doubt and give a full answer to the heart of your challenge. I want to make clear where I stand on these issues once and for all.



I have major issues, as I am sure you do, with those who would try to say America was ever a Christian nation. There has only been one legit Theocracy in the history of the world. Israel. And that went sour very quickly because they refused to follow what they said they believed and were. Yes, there were a LOT of Christians involved in our founding and founding institutions, but they were flawed men and, and there were some Deists among them (though not nearly as many as the left would claim, as can be attested by their own writings), and even a few agnostics. The idea that we should make everyone function as Christians in America now is a problem. I took issue with that with thew “Moral Majority”, and I take issue with that in its reemergence in Project 2025. (The very content of that, by the way, is why I don’t believe for a second that a man of the questionable moral fiber of Donald Trump would ever support it. Please take note of how I just described him.)



That being said, a few points. First, I don’t object to charity and helping the poor. That has, in fact, been a central part of my life for its entirety. But it’s a question of whose role it is. Charity and helping the poor is a blessed and voluntary function of the PRIVATE SECTOR. Individuals. Non-profs. Churches. Para-church orgs. They are best equipped to handle this, do it well and smoothly, and are, in fact the ones the Bible assigns that role to. Even in the Old Testament. If a man or woman stole because he was hiungry, the Government was to fine him or her and they had to pay back double.

Second, there is actual Biblical basis for the conservative position on the border. When Israel was headed to the promised land, there were a few nations along the way that got nervous about this big group of people headed their way. When Moses asked for passage through, promising to stick to the highways, to touch as little as possible, and to pay for what they ate, a few flatly told him NO. They were not told by God to go through anyway. The nations weren’t even judged for it. They were told by God, “It’s not your land. I didn’t give that to you. Respect their wishes. Respect their borders. Go around the long way. Stay above reproach.” The people had no right to demand entry into a land that did not belong to them. (We are NOT getting into the Promised Land debate here. I’m just making a point.) The Bible actually says the God establishes the borders of nations. Any nation has a right, even a duty, to protect its borders, its citizens, and its resources. It even has the right to lock them down to keep people they don’t want or can’t afford to have out. A strong border policy is actually pretty biblical.
Lol. Too much here for me to care to directly address. I will refer you back to my statement on leaning towards love and compassion over tribal hatred. I believe the second coming of the lord and savior of American Christians is on its way right now in the form of a Guatemalan husband and wife riding a mule with all their belongings strapped to it and the unborn child of god in the woman’s womb. Chew on that and your closed borders.
Finally, I don’t follow the cult of personality. I hated it when your side did it with Obama.
No man is perfect but trump is and always been so deeply flawed that no Christian would mistake him as virtuous and he’s never apologized or sought redemption. Be a better Christian. Jesus warned of wolves in sheep’s clothing.
But there are fundamental things I look for in a candidate. Are they Pro-life and Anti-abortion, and where are they on that spectrum? If they openly support the murder of babies in the womb (NOT debating that here- it’s not the point) I will never support them. If they have no regard for the concept that freedom is a gift from God, not a privilege given by government, I will never support them. If they replace freedom of religion with freedom of worship (study the history here) I will never support them. If they hold the idea that the Constitution is a “Living, evolving document”, an idea put forth by a radical leftist of his time, I will not support them. If they do not passionately, deeply love this country as it was founded to be, I will not support them. If they divide people by ethnicity, skin color, orientation, ect, and look for intersectional places where they can create a victim class, I won’t support them. If they believe that children belong to the community and schools, and not to the parents, I will not support them. If they believe that teachers know more about what kids should be taught, learn, or believe than the parents, I will never support them. If they support the racist ideology of the 1619 Project, BLM, or CRT, I will never support them. If they believe the state should be able to dictate to the churches and private citizens what they can or cannot preach and say, I will not support them. If they don’t respect the Flag, honor the troops, and hold basic values on a public level, I will not support them. There is an absolute standard in place here and I don’t shift when it is inconvenient.



Is Trump an upright, moral man? Nope. Do I take issue with some of his positions? Yep. But there is ONE person on the ballot that most closely aligns with my beliefs and views, and it ain’t Kamala. The standard of moral purity in the Whitehouse ended with the Kenedy’s, was totally obliterated by the Clintons, and probably was done away with in several other administrations behind closed doors, Dem and Rep. To demand that now of Trump is just hypocritical. I don’t like him as a man, but I do understand him. And unless you can get Tim Scott up there as the candidate, I have only one legit choice if I am going to vote my conscience. It’s not about following or worshiping a man. It’s about abiding by principles that were in place long before he came on the scene.
JS, I again advise you to step back and take another look at your values.
I hope this clears up any confusion you may have about me and my positions.

👍

My thank you was sincere. I still will reserve the right to curse your ass. But…
I will offer you this olive branch. Your threads are entertaining though deeply flawed. You have a leg up there over the other trumpers and RW policy supporters.
 
You’re a fucking moron.

Fact checking checks facts. They review information and compare it to evidence. They review sources of news and report their track records. They reveal liars and the lies they tell.

No wonder you think they hate liars and cons like you.


Fact checking first of all requires FACTS, not fake bullshit and lies fabricated by an underground bunch of crank fascism worshipers.

But you go all in on thinking that we need an entire army of people to look into whether a lie is even worth looking into and then tell the world about how it was looked into.

Meanwhile I'll just continue on calling the shots like I see them. Which is that liars like you shouldn't get any airtime at all.
 
Back
Top