Alot of liberals say World Net Daily isnt credible why do you say that is it because you dont want to address?

Question

the issue.

Answer 1

My observation is that anything or anyone with an opposing opinion or idea to liberalism ..gets attacked or called not credible . One example in a sea of many is the FOX network , for instance - not entirely conservative- but it does offer more fairness than the other mainstream media outlets (which was zero at last count) . Fox is called unfair-yet it was not FOX who had Dan Rather & his counterfiet documents being pushed as "news" . Another example is the so-called "Fairness Doctrine" , geared to put an end to anything but the same old same old liberal agenda in the mainstream media ; as well as surfing the net as we know it ; not to mention talk radio who they fear the most . I recently saw an article by one of the columnists on WorldNetDaily , which said , "stop buying the negative venom you are fed everyday by the media ; shut off the TV ; Burn Newsweek ; use the NY Times for the bottom of your birdcage then start being grateful for all we have as a country ". Sounds credible to me . I also learned on WorldNetDaily that John Edwards bills himself as a "regular guy" who claims the poor are downtrodden by the wealthy - yet he gets $400 haircuts & spent more to build his home , than most Americans make in a lifetime . I don't need a website to tell me what's credible - but thus far - I've seen nothing to the contrary at WND .

Answer 2

No opinion tutor that disguises itself as a information tutor is credible. Hannity, O'Reilly, Matthews, Maddow, Shultz, The View, those douches on Fox and acquaintances in the Morning - I evaluate none of them information. To be truthful, the only information source i glance into the Morning show with Robin Meade on HLN. each and each tale gets approximately 30 seconds, so there is minimum time for an opinion to be spewed out. Plus Robin Meade is ridiculously warm

Answer 3

Unfortunately, both sides do this.

For instance, I have found that there exist a few on Y/A who can not conceive of a non-FOX source as being credible.

It's not just the liberals . . . it's just the IDIOTS. Idiots cross all party lines. They're viral.

Here, as an example, are several WND articles, which, of course, aren't credible one tiny bit, because they cast George Bush in a bad light:

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/archives.asp?AUTHOR_ID=246

See how it works?

All sites are credible . . . right up to the point where you disagree with something they post. Then, they aren't credible one little bit

Isn't life just the funniest thing?

Answer 4

If I recall correctly, it's one of the multitude of newspapers owned by Rupert Murdoch, who is well-known for his conservative views. I don't particularly care about his personal views but I do have a problem with his newspapers. I don't like how they focus a great deal on entertainment and gossip, which are non-news events. It's the same thing for Fox News. It's mainly a gossip channel and unfortunately, the other news networks have picked up on this practice. I would like to see a return to real news and leave the gossip to the tabloids.

Answer 5

Because it has an open and pronounced conservative bias. That doesn't mean that any particular article on World Net Daily isn't itself credible, but it could hardly be called authoratitive. The purpose of WND isn't to provide a fair analysis, it's to push a particular political agenda.

Answer 6

The easiest way to discredit anything is a generalized comment like "it's not credible". No reasons given, no alternatives suggested, just a negative comment because they do not want to, or can't, address the issues.

Answer 7

Research Ad Hominem, and you will understand how the left argues. You don't believe me, research it. When you cannot rely on facts and empirical data, you will hear some story that tugs on your emotions.

Oh its for the kids or whatever.

When they say it is not a credible source, just state prove it. They are making the assertion, make them prove it.

Answer 8

When one knows that his position cannot hold water in the presence of hard facts and common sense, his only way to save face is to discredit the source or the person.

Answer 9

http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/august2006/180806issueretraction.htm

This is an article forcing them to retract their statements..

You claim that liberals attack this group, well its funny how FOC and Conservatives feel they can go around pretending everythign they say should be taken as fact, when its all a lopsided opninion..

Read the forced retraction!!!

You and people like you would rather here gossip and opinions than really want to know whats going on in the country.

Is it because youre too weak minded and gullible or just as greedy and ruthless as bush is?

Answer 10

We are all doomed!! Trust no Source Of Information!!cause the guy that wants you to think this buys a company to say that. everything you need to know in life can be learned from star wars. Example darth sidious probably owns both the conflicting sources of information and plays it to his advantage