Why should anyone need any news source. Think for yourself. Draw your on conclusions from the facts. People should be able to judge a news sources credibility from the dispositions of the people reporting the news. If you rely entirely on ONE source for your information, of course you'll always get a one sided arguement. The problem with most americans is they are complacent and too lazy to do their own leg work. It's just easier to take someone elses word for it, rather than to find out.
obviously your a left winger, since your crying that fox news gives a bias to right wingers...Why arent you also calling out msnbc and cnn forgiving a bigger bias to the left?
@tuytle4 actually but the thing is MSNBC & CNN don't overtly claim to be center & "FAIR & BALANCED" like Fox News. When it comes down to it, the media sucks they never really ask the tough questions to the people THEY SHOULD be asking. how so a bigger bias? I mean 8 years of the Bush admin. and Fox News supported everything they did while calling people who didn't support the Bush admin un-American for not siding with the president, by their standard, they should support Obama, don't you think?
This vid is an eg. of what i fell in love with when i discovered youtube. Thru vids like yours, i found tyt and several other channels; and these led me into routinely checking a huge variety of sources to get my news...
Certainly a main reason for using several different sources is becuz the right questions are seldom asked by one source only...
It drives me crazy that when a person SHOULD be questioned about something or a question is posed during an interview, NOBODY will say it. I watch FOX and MSNBC, CNN and all but I also do tons of research with many other sources including international sources. I try to be as FAIR as possible. youtube is a great source for political videos, because if the person said it, you can back track and find it on youtube. This is only one of many examples of Fox News giving bias to right wingers.
Fox News is only biased to the right in comparison to the overwhelming majority of the remainder of the media which is slanted to the left. That said, we should _all_ be doing our own homework and not taking what the media, or people on YouTube, are saying as gospel.
in comparison with what I wrote. We couldn't agree more! It irritates me when I hear people say they get their news from (fill in here) only. I don't consider Fox News a real news organization anymore because they're reporting on stuff that isn't real... "death books" and "death panels" if they were a REAL news organization they would know that...
And a real news organization would look at other countries, with a fraction of our population and liabilities that are already considered unfunded, and see that they have rationing bodies. It is neither a leap to consider the possibility that we too would have such institutions should we make the same mistake others have, nor wrong to point out that such institutions exist under socialized healthcare systems.
The problem is, "death panels" area a very real part of nationalized healthcare. When you have a finite resource, in this case, healthcare, you are going to have a rationing body (aka a "death panel"). Part of the problem with the media is this susceptibility to buying what they're selling without doing your own research.
I read HR3200, have you? I have the actual passage that talks about these so called "death panels", let me tell you, it doesn't exist... also, maybe you should do your own research. Palin has also called on these "death books" called "your life, your choices" have you read that? I have and it's not a "death book". Maybe you should do your own research before you preach to someone else about doing research.
Your research is coming from the same flawed practice much of the media employs. You start with a conclusion, and then you find "facts" to support that conclusion, and discard anything that does not. Simply because rationing bodies (aka "death panels") do not exist in current legislation does not mean they will not be added at a later day. You can piss on my leg all you like, but I will never accept your position that it is raining..
Actually, I read the bill before the "death panel" talk. Also, you just admitted that in the existing legislation there are no "death panels" in litigation, speculation is not permitted in a court of law. You're speculating that just because it's not in the bill "does not mean they wil not be added at a later day". Please learn about legal practices in the United States before you make claims like that:-) Also the bill is very clear about end of life counseling to which Repubs supported in 2004
Why should anyone need any news source. Think for yourself. Draw your on conclusions from the facts. People should be able to judge a news sources credibility from the dispositions of the people reporting the news. If you rely entirely on ONE source for your information, of course you'll always get a one sided arguement. The problem with most americans is they are complacent and too lazy to do their own leg work. It's just easier to take someone elses word for it, rather than to find out.
RobNLynchburgVA 1 year ago
obviously your a left winger, since your crying that fox news gives a bias to right wingers...Why arent you also calling out msnbc and cnn forgiving a bigger bias to the left?
tuytle4 1 year ago
@tuytle4 actually but the thing is MSNBC & CNN don't overtly claim to be center & "FAIR & BALANCED" like Fox News. When it comes down to it, the media sucks they never really ask the tough questions to the people THEY SHOULD be asking. how so a bigger bias? I mean 8 years of the Bush admin. and Fox News supported everything they did while calling people who didn't support the Bush admin un-American for not siding with the president, by their standard, they should support Obama, don't you think?
ERAUPRCWA 1 year ago
Yup, good one, erau...
This vid is an eg. of what i fell in love with when i discovered youtube. Thru vids like yours, i found tyt and several other channels; and these led me into routinely checking a huge variety of sources to get my news...
Certainly a main reason for using several different sources is becuz the right questions are seldom asked by one source only...
Opiman000 2 years ago
It drives me crazy that when a person SHOULD be questioned about something or a question is posed during an interview, NOBODY will say it. I watch FOX and MSNBC, CNN and all but I also do tons of research with many other sources including international sources. I try to be as FAIR as possible. youtube is a great source for political videos, because if the person said it, you can back track and find it on youtube. This is only one of many examples of Fox News giving bias to right wingers.
ERAUPRCWA 2 years ago
Fox News is only biased to the right in comparison to the overwhelming majority of the remainder of the media which is slanted to the left. That said, we should _all_ be doing our own homework and not taking what the media, or people on YouTube, are saying as gospel.
Anakha13 2 years ago
in comparison with what I wrote. We couldn't agree more! It irritates me when I hear people say they get their news from (fill in here) only. I don't consider Fox News a real news organization anymore because they're reporting on stuff that isn't real... "death books" and "death panels" if they were a REAL news organization they would know that...
ERAUPRCWA 2 years ago
And a real news organization would look at other countries, with a fraction of our population and liabilities that are already considered unfunded, and see that they have rationing bodies. It is neither a leap to consider the possibility that we too would have such institutions should we make the same mistake others have, nor wrong to point out that such institutions exist under socialized healthcare systems.
Anakha13 2 years ago
Good commentary, god bless ya.
notscooter952 2 years ago
damn you're quick, I just posited this... about 5 seconds AFTER I got done posting it, I get a comment, lol. thanks... sometimes things get ya going.
ERAUPRCWA 2 years ago
The problem is, "death panels" area a very real part of nationalized healthcare. When you have a finite resource, in this case, healthcare, you are going to have a rationing body (aka a "death panel"). Part of the problem with the media is this susceptibility to buying what they're selling without doing your own research.
Anakha13 2 years ago
I read HR3200, have you? I have the actual passage that talks about these so called "death panels", let me tell you, it doesn't exist... also, maybe you should do your own research. Palin has also called on these "death books" called "your life, your choices" have you read that? I have and it's not a "death book". Maybe you should do your own research before you preach to someone else about doing research.
ERAUPRCWA 2 years ago
Your research is coming from the same flawed practice much of the media employs. You start with a conclusion, and then you find "facts" to support that conclusion, and discard anything that does not. Simply because rationing bodies (aka "death panels") do not exist in current legislation does not mean they will not be added at a later day. You can piss on my leg all you like, but I will never accept your position that it is raining..
Anakha13 2 years ago
Actually, I read the bill before the "death panel" talk. Also, you just admitted that in the existing legislation there are no "death panels" in litigation, speculation is not permitted in a court of law. You're speculating that just because it's not in the bill "does not mean they wil not be added at a later day". Please learn about legal practices in the United States before you make claims like that:-) Also the bill is very clear about end of life counseling to which Repubs supported in 2004
ERAUPRCWA 2 years ago
Nice try mate! better luck next time you dirty bogan:-)
ERAUPRCWA 2 years ago