Are Many of the Liberals on This Site.. . .. ..really Just Victims ?

Question

Victims of bogus, hateful, subversive websites that promote falsehoods ?

Years ago, we got our news from News Anchors whose Integrity was EVERYTHING . Rarely did anyone make a mistake and broadcast anything biased or untruthful . The News Anchors relied on their TRUSTWORTHINESS, rather than HYPE, OPINION, or WEBSITE GARBAGE(there was no internet) .

Although the Liberals try to claim that they're all adults, we all know that many or most of our youth now, and before, were/are of a general liberal mind-set . And the internet is largely used by our younger generations . We, older folk, could've been fooled as well, if we were exposed to nonsense everywhere we looked .

So, are Liberals on this site victims of bogus reporting ?

Hey MAP - That may be true, but I'll tell ya what I DO KNOW . You did not ANSWER the question. . . a problem experienced by most LIBERALS . Read guidelines. . . mmmmmmk ?

Answer 1

Victims...Ha...Ha...LOL...That is effin funny...Ha Ha

Allowing yourself to be defined by victimization is a Liberal thought process in it's self. So yeah, whatever. They are all victims of something.

Answer 2

I've noticed there seems to be more a mentality about going with the acceptable view and not rocking the boat. I agree......I feel we got more of a balanced view than just what the anchors opinion is. There is more "speculation" than fact anymore when it comes to the news.

I mean it's sad to think a popularity contest is the basis for news and if they report it nicely enough or not, or have a special twist to make it more palatable. I want the news......not what they think I want to know or what they'll allow me to know or what's PC to know.

I'm conservative and even though I don't like to hear the death of anyone.....I don't get the big whoopla about Anna Nicole Smith. I'd much rather they free up air space and tell me the facts when they get them, instead of this mindless speculation.

Answer 3

I agree with you on this one - there is a victim attitude and there are too many bogus websites. And the internet does have an extremely poor quality of information, after all there are conspiracy sites by the dozen. But what about far-right pro-white groups? What is the moderate right doing about them? You're not APPEASING to them are you?

Sure, you were young once. So give us a break and help us out by encouraging the regulation of media to deliver us from our 'nonsense'. Because we're more experienced with computers we have more capability in assimilating information efficiently. We understand that you have to be flexible, if you want to survive, and that's a lesson we have learnt ourselves. But if you want to decrease state involvement, and take away the protection from the insane religious right and all the insane rubbish that filters its way into textbooks while real scientists and researchers are patronized and persecuted, then you might as well shoot us in the heads because that's the only future we deserve.

Answer 4

I'm probably older than you, I learned long ago to stick with the MSM for my news and to let even that shake out for a couple of days before commenting on it. Everyone's in such a rush to be the first with the news, there's very little investigating going on. I seldom believe what I see on the internet until I can verify it from reputable sources. I view what I see on Fox and CNN as being biased and treat it as such. Evidently the younger generation are not the only ones to be influenced by what they see or hear on the internet, I see quite a few old fools that can't differentiate between fact and fiction posting on these forums.

Answer 5

Earnest T has a good point up to the part where he pins it all on Liberals. There are plenty of Right Wingers here that use bogus stories from questionable websites.

The overall point is still a good one. Why are there so many of you on here that take what these questionable websites say and run with it without giving these statements any critical thought? Are the people of America getting too lazy to think for themselves?

Answer 6

It became conservative Ann Coulter who became the the first to publicly denounce 9/11 victims' households, and extra those days, conservative Glenn Beck. nevertheless, i does not assume that each and each body conservatives are this heartless, that could be an inane generalization. Secondly, Islam is between the (if not THE) fastest starting to be religions interior the international. As their numbers upward push, the numbers of mosques will upward push as well - throughout this u . s ., around the international, and quite in places of dense inhabitants like large apple. tens of millions and tens of millions of Muslims international at the instantaneous are to not be blamed for the politically-influenced atrocities of a few. to finish that is, once extra, an inane generalization. may you be both incensed if Christians were construction a huge church in Oklahoma city? one among Glen Beck's comments on the topic of 9/11 households: "you comprehend, it took me about a three hundred and sixty 5 days to commence hating the 9/11 victims' households. It took me about a three hundred and sixty 5 days. Um, and that i had such compassion for them and that i quite, you comprehend, i needed to assist them, and that i became in the back of -- allow's supply them funds, allow's get them began, and all of those products. and that i quite did not -- all the three,000 victims' households, i do not hate all of them, I hate about, likely about ten of them. yet after I see 9/11 sufferer kin, you comprehend, on television, or inspite of, i'm a useless ringer for, 'Oh, close up.' i'm so ill of them. because they are continuously complaining. And we did our staggering for them." Coulter wrote in her e book, “Godless: The Church of Liberalism,” that a collection of latest Jersey widows whose husbands perished interior the international commerce center act “as if the terrorist attacks occurred purely to them.” She also wrote, “I’ve not in any respect considered human beings taking area of their husbands’ deaths a lot. i'd not often call Churchill an "icon", and that i does not generalize that each and each body liberals stood in the back of his statements. Many did, although, stand in the back of his first ammendment acceptable to freedom of speech. He lost his pastime over his comments. Beck and Coulter did not.

Answer 7

Well I'm a 34 year old fiscally-conservative Liberal, and I've never relied on the internet for my news. I rely on the network evening news and my local newspaper. So I would venture to say that I'm not a victim of anything. I use my brain and I'm not blindly loyal to King George and the neocons.Conversely, could I ask whether conservatives are a victim of bogus reporting from Fox News and talk radio?

Answer 8

I'd say that the neocons and ditto heads who just parrot what they heard on Faux news are the victims of bogus reporting.
BTW I am a liberal whose beliefs were cemented by living the reality of a misguided war. Don't tell me that those mortars and bullets I was dodging in Vietnam, were HYPE, OPINION, or WEBSITE GARBAGE.

Answer 9

I am a victim of all of your questions. Do you ever ask conservatives a question? Or do you just give them best answer, even though the questions are directed to liberals?

Answer 10

You were impressed by Captain Oblivious's rightw-ing indoctrination as "brilliant"? huh.

Your question is all over the place, "bogus" as you put it, dishonest, and pretty "hateful" yourself.

Quit sending me hatemail whining about my answers.

Put this question in a garbage can where it belongs.