If you're going to rely on a source then you can't just rely on half of what they said.If you didn't witness it or your eyes didn't see it, how do you really know it's truth?
|
|
If you're going to rely on a source then you can't just rely on half of what they said.If you didn't witness it or your eyes didn't see it, how do you really know it's truth?
You don't think a fellow gtamer should talk about his crash in general forum, you don't think we made it to the moon, so why would any one listen to you.I would hope man walked on the moon, Like everything nowadays, was even controversial media back then.
Weren’t you the man behind the grassy knollAnd the Kennedy assassination - I wasn't in Dallas at the time.
That’s ordinary when people don’t agree with you. Most will try to attack your point.You don't think a fellow gtamer should talk about his crash in general forum, you don't think we made it to the moon, so why would any one listen to you.
Like when Biden said that violent crime was down?Something that is not correct is not a half truth. It’s just wrong.
Rule one in journalism was to check all sources. That's the ruin of news media today; in their haste to publish, they've developed a list of "reliable" sources, that have their own agendas.If you're going to rely on a source then you can't just rely on half of what they said.
Like when Biden said that violent crime was down?
Rule one in journalism was to check all sources. That's the ruin of news media today; in their haste to publish, they've developed a list of "reliable" sources, that have their own agendas.
Most annoying for me is news outlets trying to show all issues have "two sides" = manufactured controversy.
And that agenda is either Right Wing idiocy, or money.Like when Biden said that violent crime was down?
Rule one in journalism was to check all sources. That's the ruin of news media today; in their haste to publish, they've developed a list of "reliable" sources, that have their own agendas.
Is the reverse not true?I find it odd that folks are so quick to jump on the next best thing so long as it’s to support the bad orange man.
I find it odd that folks are so quick to jump on the next best thing so long as it’s to get the bad orange man
Given the current state of American politics I don't think 'true' is the right word for much of anything.Is the reverse not true?
i don’t know what to make of that speech. Trump tailors speeches to the audience, in this case he was addressing bible thumping Christians.Because the bad orange man says dangerous things like this:
![]()
Kyle Griffin (@griffinkyle) on Threads
Flagging: Trump's plea to voters last night: "Get out and vote just this time. You won't have to do it anymore. Four more years, it will be fixed. It'll be fine. You won't have to vote anymore ... In four years, you don't have to vote again. We'll have it fixed so good you’re not going to have...www.threads.net
This election is not about policy. It is about whether the USA retains a democratic structure with checks and balances, or devolves into religious authoritarianism.
i don’t know what to make of that speech. Trump tailors speeches to the audience, in this case he was addressing bible thumping Christians.
I’m sure he’d like to be King, not sure there is a realistic path to that.
Was that speech foreshadowing his plan or telling Christians everything will be so good in 4 years that Republicans won’t need every single voter to turn out.
I guess we’ll see. First he has to win, not sure that’s a slam dunk any more, Harris will close the gap.
i don’t know what to make of that speech. Trump tailors speeches to the audience, in this case he was addressing bible thumping Christians.
I’m sure he’d like to be King, not sure there is a realistic path to that.
Was that speech foreshadowing his plan or telling Christians everything will be so good in 4 years that Republicans won’t need every single voter to turn out.
I guess we’ll see. First he has to win, not sure that’s a slam dunk any more, Harris will close the gap.
|
|
|