the party is stacked with "Corporate Dems" like Chuck Schumer & the Clintons who are really just Republicans that think pot should be legal, immigration is fine and maybe we should leave the gays alone (but don't let 'em marry, that's icky).
Sorry, but that is backwards. "Progressives" are Democrats almost exclusively, and they have infiltrated the Republican party starting right around the Reagan era. You know, that guy with a R in front of his name? or maybe Eisenhower? We could go back further but I'd hate to embarrass you by showing you all of the "Progressives" who were Democrats. (It would also bring out all of the racists, segregationists, and Jim Crowe supporters. You don't want to go there.)
The Bernie Democrats (a wing of which is calling themselves "Justice Democrats") is trying to kick 'em out of the party. If you want to see the country move to the left you need to join 'em and get voting in your primary.
Yes please! The far Leftists has done such a great job for us Constitutional Conservatives over the last couple years I can't wait! I didn't want Trump, but you guys made that possible. I'd much rather have sober politicians in the Republican party who actually believe in the Constitution, instead of the mass we have now that hides their "D" with an "R" sticker.
What's the problem with wealth accumulation? Other than petty jealousy? What matters is the average quality of life and whether or not the average person is content. Who cares if someone has more than you. Worry about if you have your needs met. And your needs to not include every luxury under the sun.
Nothing like shallow fallacy logic.
The problem with accumulated wealth goes back to the first recorded Democracy and ideas recorded in Plato's "The Republic". Paraphrased for convenience, The problem with people becoming extremely wealthy is that they are free to fuck with everyone else to gain more and more wealth. The same is true for any form of power really, but money is the easiest for people to understand.
People on the Right don't hate Soros because he has money, they hate him because later in life much of his money came questionably and he funds people who he believes benefits him and his agenda in politics. People on the Left don't hate the Koch brothers because they have money, they hate him because they fund people who they believe benefit them and their agenda in politics.
Have another weak ad hominem you wish us to correct?
I think it's good to remind us of these Orwellian nightmare plots and schemes. IMHO this is an idiotic thing for anyone to do. Anytime it gets promoted people do, and should, push back.
Burke "The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing."
Sure, this company may not be evil. Who else can use these chips though? Are you sure they are all going to be altruistic?
Snopes lost their reputation with most of us long ago. Sad, since I liked them early on had some fun with facts like "John Wayne didn't die with 40lbs of red meat in his colon".
There are far too many studies and reports of this bias to simply be "me." Search for the latest studies from Harvard, but also from MIT, Yale, and countless others who study facts on media. 97% of coverage on Trump has been negative. 75% of all coverage on Trump is "Russia Collusion" yet there is no evidence that Trump has done so. There has been more airtime since November on impeaching trump than on illegal immigration. Those are facts, and you are simply ignoring facts.
Is there any evidence that anyone benefited Washington's businesses on behalf of a foreign nation? A cursory reading shows there was much argument about this at the time, and that Washington himself was conflicted (is Trump I wonder?).
The fact that Washington was conflicted should make it obvious to even the most casual observer that Washington did to business with England, because the Monarchy ran the nobles who ran the businesses.
I think Washington has set a bad precedent.
No, Washington did exactly what a moral person would do. He maintained his farm, personal estate and wealth, and was concerned that he was infallible.
I'm sure that if a foreign government had deliberately dumped money into Washington's business, that Washington would have shut it down.
So you have ESP, alien voices, or take loads of hallucinogenics? Big problem with progressives, leftists, and communists. Despite a lack of evidence, you think you know everything. The truth of the matter is, you don't know and we never had to deal with this for numerous reasons. In fact, you can't even say how you would behave in a similar situation because you have never been in the position to be taken advantage of.
Would Trump? If I read his character correctly he would welcome the bribes, which would invite more bribes.
If any government has pumped money into Trump, he's duty bound to declare it, and either return it or hand it over to the United States. Has he done this?
Ahh, more ESP, aliens talking to you, or hallucinogenic drugs. There is no such evidence, and President Trump is in a position of power. We _know_ that the Clintons took massive amounts of cash from Russia, Saudi Arabia, Iran, China, etc... How about you address your moral outrage at an actual event with actual facts that we could investigate. If Trump does something wrong we can join in and make sure it's addressed properly. You, and all of the other leftists are demanding action on non-facts and ignoring actual facts because it's harmful to your team. Marxism at it's finest.
I'll start simple, just to show how full of shit you are. No members of a foreign Government purchased Obama's books? Prove it! You can't! If you truly believe such a foolish notion, your outrage needs to be at every single President who has ever served in the office. Once again, the point is to protect the US from a coup, not prevent business people from entering politics.
It is illegal for a President to take money or titles from a foreign Government due to the unique position of the President to turn over our Military to that foreign Government. A valid fear at the time the clause was written was that a President would take a princely title and turn over the US to England. The founders were as infallible as every other human who walked the Earth (depending on your Religious views there may have been 1 infallible person in history). There is a history around the emoluments clause, despite your ignorance (feigned or otherwise).
The dot-com bubble broke the priesthood and everyone who could put up a web site. Unfortunately most of those people were clueless. If not for massive virus outbreaks stealing people's credit cards and destroying the web servers that the clueless put up, the dot-com bubble would not have burst so badly. I quoted 20 or so projects for Solaris in that last few months before Melissa, and lost all of the bids to some small company running Windows. Needless to say, all 20 of those people started calling me for help after they lost their servers and customers begging me to help.
My answer then is the same as today. "I'm like the maid, I don't do windows..."
It is relevant because the person Lostone responded to was giving incorrect information in a generalization. RFCs give site owners the ability to control how a dot works in their email system.
If AC above would have said "In Google's world" it would have been correct, but they were not so specific. On a techie site especially, the difference between RFC and [SITE] implementation is a good thing.
You should really consider looking into having similar problems. Why? A human can't pay attention to that much information at any given time. If you are researching a book, you may have a hundred or two references but most of those are one time checks. Not open reading material, and not something you need after you make sure you have the quotes/concepts correct. Once you have to fish for labels in your tabs, the efficiency drops dramatically. You are faster to have a bookmark or re-search for the source than wait for a mouse-over popup to tell you the title.
Now I am quite sure that we all have different limitations. I'm sure we could find the limit on efficiency though, and I'd be willing to bet a box of donuts that it's well below 100.
If Trump had business dealings, loans, etc.. from Russia the Federal Government would know. He does not need to release his long form to the public for the Government to know whether or not his business dealings are clean, and who they are with. The business registry and financial disclosure forms give information to not just the IRS, but DHS, FBI, State Department, CIA, DOJ, and a few other agencies as well.
I have no idea how all of you people can live under the same rock. I can suggest you come out for air on occasion, because the smothering suffocation is making you all brain dead.
Utter bullshit! George Washington owned a plantation and sold goods to England while he was President. Do you want me to go through the list of every other President of the US who has had International business on numerous levels? Hell, former President Obama sold books to people overseas and cashed in money from those "damn dirty Ruskies" and everyone else who bought his books!
While I am not saying that we have no bias in the courts (because that would be a lie) Justice is supposed to be blind. If Obama sold books to foreigners for profit and that was fine, Trump can rent a hotel room or collect golf fees from foreigners and be fine too.
The point of the emoluments clause is to protect against bribery. Not to prevent successful business people from entering the political sphere. Believe it or not, the Founders knew about both International business and Bribery. People need to stop pretending that they are so much smarter than the Founders. We have history to show you how wrong that position is.
Prosecute Trump for violating the emoluments clause, and I have a list of Congress critters and Senators with foreign holdings that will come next.
Huh? I can surely be reasoned with, but reason requires facts. Show me where any media talks about actual issues from a right wing position. I gave a couple examples where a person can find them. You can't find facts so claim I can't be reasoned with because I don't believe in fairy tales?
It is a _FACT_ that none of those sources are related to or even mentioned by CNN, *NBC, ABC, CBS, PBS, or any other TV media company. None of those TV media channels express a right-wing position, they primarily express the left/anti-left dialogue if they even bother to present the anti-left.
It is a _FACT_ that NYT, WAPO, HuffPO, etc.. etc... do not mention those sources or express a right wing position either. SJ Mercury News prints the same stories as NYT, WAPO, etc.., because the ownership is the same. I could say the same for most printed papers in the US today. I see a leftist dialogue and there isn't even an anti-left position portrayed normally.
If you wish to change my opinion, start producing _facts_. I can't watch and read everything, so perhaps I'm missing material I shouldn't. I do watch Fox and CNN both regularly enough, read NYT and SJ Mercury News daily, but perhaps I am seeing all the wrong shows at the wrong time.
Or you could simply be ignoring the bias I see for whatever reason. In that case, it's not me that can't be reasoned with but you.
Really? And you know this because Aliens whispered in your ear? You regularly commune with mushrooms and have gained deity status? Those voices in your head keep telling you so?
When you begin your opinion with a false generalization, anything else you say should be dismissed. _YOU_ may not want to think, but don't project your virtues (or lack thereof) onto everyone else.
Could you rephrase that argument to make sense? You claimed that Trump is not a moron, which I do understand. You also claimed he has philosophies, which I've been unable to perceive. As far as the rest....
Simplest way is by example: Trump "We need to protect our borders!" Opposition "He's a racist!"
There is no argument, just an ad hominem attack. Instead of discussing the actual issues that have been around since the 1960s and coming to a solution, the Left continues to proclaim "Racist" and cherry picks anything they can to support their claim of racism, and the Right spends all it's time saying "no, it's not racist" and trying to demonstrate how the cherry picking is not correct.
I don't know where your philosophies are, but the US has a Constitution who's founders who believed very strongly in individual liberty and saw how power in a Governments hands destroys that individual liberty. The Federal Government is limited in power and supposed to be by design. That power has grown enormously over the last 40 years. The "Right" (read not Fox, but people who believe in individual liberty) have been, and are, pushing back against those encroachments of power. We now have an administrative State and Judicial branch which have more power than any of the 3 Constitutional branches of Government and zero accountability to the people. We can't vote them out because they are appointees, we can't vote on their laws because they don't ask and don't have to.
There are actually very few "Right" wing opinions. I can give you a few radio stations and authors (like Dennis Prager, Mark Levin), but those people don't have a National Media platform. A couple of those "Right" wingers may make brief and rare appearances on Fox, but you won't hear them quoted in NYT, WAPO, Huffpo, CNN, *NBC, or any other media outlet. People don't quote Friedman, they quote leftist economics and ignore Friedman. People don't quote the founders, they promote the politicians and elites that own them. In fact they denounce the founders.
Trump is not a moron. None of those in politics are morons. We may not be able to understand what they do or why, but they do things very intentionally.
CNN had to make a major retraction and had 3 journalists resign over the most recent retraction, but they have had numerous retractions and have numerous lawsuits pending for libel and slander. This is not including those that have been settled out of court, and resulted in other "journalist" resignations. CNN repeatedly quote stories from NYT and WAPO which have their own long list of retractions, and libel/slander cases.
CNN has also staged election questions, self admitted promoted politicians they like, and fed a candidate they liked election questions ahead of time so that they could prepare answers ahead of time (at least 1 that we know of).
CNN has been caught openly gatekeeping (Cuomo telling people it was illegal for them to read information from Wikileaks), Staging fake scenes of protests, staging fake crime scenes, lying about reporter locations and green screening "live" reports.
Funny that "Snopes" lists the most recently reported staging of a protests false because CNN claimed if was false. No bias in Snopes right?
Sources: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/..., https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/..., and you can google the others. Just make sure you omit "cnn.com" from the results. Google "cnn lies" and the links mostly point to CNN stories denying that they lied. No collusion involved, I know.. Google isn't part of the charade either...
The other problem is the "both sides" narrative doesn't work with the current media. Right wingers keep claiming NBC, CNN, The Washington Post, et al, are "left wing". Those of us on the left just don't see it.
No kidding? Does anyone really need to explain that to you? see "Confirmation Bias" and "Cognitive Dissonance".
A big problem today is that Fox does not usually present a "right" opinion either. They claim the left is wrong on some stuff, but the left wing opinion is the only one in play. This is called "Hegelian Dialectic" and Hegelism, which was employed by Germany, USSR, China, etc...
Simply thinking the current President is terrible does not make you the counter to the right wing media. Hell, the intelligent side of the right thinks he's a moron too, they just don't say it in public.
The intelligent people on the right don't call him a moron because that is not true. Just like the far left's claim of every "ist" and "phobe" you can find isn't true. The intelligent people on the right are concerned with his policies and the philosophies which form those policies.
It is impossible to discuss policies when trying to argue with people who's main argument is "he's a moron".
i'd wager that a fair number of people do not read the news to stay informed, but to reinforce the views they already hold.
That means exactly what I said above, that Journalism is dead. Journalism isn't supposed to be just presenting your opinion, or the opinion someone wants you to present. Journalism is supposed to be primarily obtaining and presenting the fullest set of facts possible so that the reader/listener can make up their own mind about an opinion with all of the facts journalism made available.
Even in the age of the video recorder everywhere catching people in media lying, we have very little real journalism. We have liars, and people catching the liars as the story. The truth is not present in either of those situations.
Pretty damn obvious when a post saying "one should read them all" gets moderated troll, and the name calling posts against Breitbart get moderated +5 insightful. Facts may hurt on occasion, but they are facts.
All of media today lies, plain and simple. CNN, and NBC have both been caught repeatedly fabricating, staging, and editing content to promote a narrative instead of performing actual journalism. Watch either of those 2 stations and you hear the half a set of fact they need to support the narrative they want you to hear and believe. Nothing more. Not unique to them, just the most obvious offenders.
It is the information vacuum which gives rise to sites like Infowars. They lie too! If you want to see how bad US media has become with propaganda, just read about the same topic on NYT and Breitbart and compare. Watch CNN and Fox and compare. Same subject, two separate sets of facts being discussed, and two completely different opinions being presented. Amazingly, they both tend to favor the leftist agenda.
Journalism in the US is dead, and has been for quite a while. The only difference between today and 10 years ago is that it's easier to see media caught in the act. Trust in Journalism is the only thing lower than approval for politicians.
It's not the bike riding that lefties get wrong, it's that they ideologically want to give more and more power to the Government. That comes from regulations, part of which is taxes.
TFA seems to believe that since they can't think of a purpose for masking, and that a single (in their words "cheapest money can" [I assume they meant] "buy") home router doesn't use masking, that it must be the end of a field that's been in HTML for as long as HTML has had a standard.. Training sessions, remote support sessions, documentation, and yes preventing shoulder surfing are all reasons that the password field type will probably never go away.
Slashdot Mirror
the party is stacked with "Corporate Dems" like Chuck Schumer & the Clintons who are really just Republicans that think pot should be legal, immigration is fine and maybe we should leave the gays alone (but don't let 'em marry, that's icky).
Sorry, but that is backwards. "Progressives" are Democrats almost exclusively, and they have infiltrated the Republican party starting right around the Reagan era. You know, that guy with a R in front of his name? or maybe Eisenhower? We could go back further but I'd hate to embarrass you by showing you all of the "Progressives" who were Democrats. (It would also bring out all of the racists, segregationists, and Jim Crowe supporters. You don't want to go there.)
The Bernie Democrats (a wing of which is calling themselves "Justice Democrats") is trying to kick 'em out of the party. If you want to see the country move to the left you need to join 'em and get voting in your primary.
Yes please! The far Leftists has done such a great job for us Constitutional Conservatives over the last couple years I can't wait! I didn't want Trump, but you guys made that possible. I'd much rather have sober politicians in the Republican party who actually believe in the Constitution, instead of the mass we have now that hides their "D" with an "R" sticker.
What's the problem with wealth accumulation? Other than petty jealousy? What matters is the average quality of life and whether or not the average person is content. Who cares if someone has more than you. Worry about if you have your needs met. And your needs to not include every luxury under the sun.
Nothing like shallow fallacy logic.
The problem with accumulated wealth goes back to the first recorded Democracy and ideas recorded in Plato's "The Republic". Paraphrased for convenience, The problem with people becoming extremely wealthy is that they are free to fuck with everyone else to gain more and more wealth. The same is true for any form of power really, but money is the easiest for people to understand.
People on the Right don't hate Soros because he has money, they hate him because later in life much of his money came questionably and he funds people who he believes benefits him and his agenda in politics. People on the Left don't hate the Koch brothers because they have money, they hate him because they fund people who they believe benefit them and their agenda in politics.
Have another weak ad hominem you wish us to correct?
I think it's good to remind us of these Orwellian nightmare plots and schemes. IMHO this is an idiotic thing for anyone to do. Anytime it gets promoted people do, and should, push back.
Burke "The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing."
Sure, this company may not be evil. Who else can use these chips though? Are you sure they are all going to be altruistic?
Snopes lost their reputation with most of us long ago. Sad, since I liked them early on had some fun with facts like "John Wayne didn't die with 40lbs of red meat in his colon".
And they know about these Deutsch Bank loans because of their filings right? Are the Germans now colluding with Russia too?
There are far too many studies and reports of this bias to simply be "me." Search for the latest studies from Harvard, but also from MIT, Yale, and countless others who study facts on media. 97% of coverage on Trump has been negative. 75% of all coverage on Trump is "Russia Collusion" yet there is no evidence that Trump has done so. There has been more airtime since November on impeaching trump than on illegal immigration. Those are facts, and you are simply ignoring facts.
Is there any evidence that anyone benefited Washington's businesses on behalf of a foreign nation? A cursory reading shows there was much argument about this at the time, and that Washington himself was conflicted (is Trump I wonder?) .
The fact that Washington was conflicted should make it obvious to even the most casual observer that Washington did to business with England, because the Monarchy ran the nobles who ran the businesses.
I think Washington has set a bad precedent.
No, Washington did exactly what a moral person would do. He maintained his farm, personal estate and wealth, and was concerned that he was infallible.
I'm sure that if a foreign government had deliberately dumped money into Washington's business, that Washington would have shut it down.
So you have ESP, alien voices, or take loads of hallucinogenics? Big problem with progressives, leftists, and communists. Despite a lack of evidence, you think you know everything. The truth of the matter is, you don't know and we never had to deal with this for numerous reasons. In fact, you can't even say how you would behave in a similar situation because you have never been in the position to be taken advantage of.
Would Trump? If I read his character correctly he would welcome the bribes, which would invite more bribes.
If any government has pumped money into Trump, he's duty bound to declare it, and either return it or hand it over to the United States. Has he done this?
Ahh, more ESP, aliens talking to you, or hallucinogenic drugs. There is no such evidence, and President Trump is in a position of power. We _know_ that the Clintons took massive amounts of cash from Russia, Saudi Arabia, Iran, China, etc... How about you address your moral outrage at an actual event with actual facts that we could investigate. If Trump does something wrong we can join in and make sure it's addressed properly. You, and all of the other leftists are demanding action on non-facts and ignoring actual facts because it's harmful to your team. Marxism at it's finest.
I'll start simple, just to show how full of shit you are. No members of a foreign Government purchased Obama's books? Prove it! You can't! If you truly believe such a foolish notion, your outrage needs to be at every single President who has ever served in the office. Once again, the point is to protect the US from a coup, not prevent business people from entering politics.
It is illegal for a President to take money or titles from a foreign Government due to the unique position of the President to turn over our Military to that foreign Government. A valid fear at the time the clause was written was that a President would take a princely title and turn over the US to England. The founders were as infallible as every other human who walked the Earth (depending on your Religious views there may have been 1 infallible person in history). There is a history around the emoluments clause, despite your ignorance (feigned or otherwise).
The dot-com bubble broke the priesthood and everyone who could put up a web site. Unfortunately most of those people were clueless. If not for massive virus outbreaks stealing people's credit cards and destroying the web servers that the clueless put up, the dot-com bubble would not have burst so badly. I quoted 20 or so projects for Solaris in that last few months before Melissa, and lost all of the bids to some small company running Windows. Needless to say, all 20 of those people started calling me for help after they lost their servers and customers begging me to help.
My answer then is the same as today. "I'm like the maid, I don't do windows..."
It is relevant because the person Lostone responded to was giving incorrect information in a generalization. RFCs give site owners the ability to control how a dot works in their email system.
If AC above would have said "In Google's world" it would have been correct, but they were not so specific. On a techie site especially, the difference between RFC and [SITE] implementation is a good thing.
You should really consider looking into having similar problems. Why? A human can't pay attention to that much information at any given time. If you are researching a book, you may have a hundred or two references but most of those are one time checks. Not open reading material, and not something you need after you make sure you have the quotes/concepts correct. Once you have to fish for labels in your tabs, the efficiency drops dramatically. You are faster to have a bookmark or re-search for the source than wait for a mouse-over popup to tell you the title.
Now I am quite sure that we all have different limitations. I'm sure we could find the limit on efficiency though, and I'd be willing to bet a box of donuts that it's well below 100.
If Trump had business dealings, loans, etc.. from Russia the Federal Government would know. He does not need to release his long form to the public for the Government to know whether or not his business dealings are clean, and who they are with. The business registry and financial disclosure forms give information to not just the IRS, but DHS, FBI, State Department, CIA, DOJ, and a few other agencies as well.
I have no idea how all of you people can live under the same rock. I can suggest you come out for air on occasion, because the smothering suffocation is making you all brain dead.
Utter bullshit! George Washington owned a plantation and sold goods to England while he was President. Do you want me to go through the list of every other President of the US who has had International business on numerous levels? Hell, former President Obama sold books to people overseas and cashed in money from those "damn dirty Ruskies" and everyone else who bought his books!
While I am not saying that we have no bias in the courts (because that would be a lie) Justice is supposed to be blind. If Obama sold books to foreigners for profit and that was fine, Trump can rent a hotel room or collect golf fees from foreigners and be fine too.
The point of the emoluments clause is to protect against bribery. Not to prevent successful business people from entering the political sphere. Believe it or not, the Founders knew about both International business and Bribery. People need to stop pretending that they are so much smarter than the Founders. We have history to show you how wrong that position is.
Prosecute Trump for violating the emoluments clause, and I have a list of Congress critters and Senators with foreign holdings that will come next.
Huh? I can surely be reasoned with, but reason requires facts. Show me where any media talks about actual issues from a right wing position. I gave a couple examples where a person can find them. You can't find facts so claim I can't be reasoned with because I don't believe in fairy tales?
It is a _FACT_ that none of those sources are related to or even mentioned by CNN, *NBC, ABC, CBS, PBS, or any other TV media company. None of those TV media channels express a right-wing position, they primarily express the left/anti-left dialogue if they even bother to present the anti-left.
It is a _FACT_ that NYT, WAPO, HuffPO, etc.. etc... do not mention those sources or express a right wing position either. SJ Mercury News prints the same stories as NYT, WAPO, etc.., because the ownership is the same. I could say the same for most printed papers in the US today. I see a leftist dialogue and there isn't even an anti-left position portrayed normally.
If you wish to change my opinion, start producing _facts_. I can't watch and read everything, so perhaps I'm missing material I shouldn't. I do watch Fox and CNN both regularly enough, read NYT and SJ Mercury News daily, but perhaps I am seeing all the wrong shows at the wrong time.
Or you could simply be ignoring the bias I see for whatever reason. In that case, it's not me that can't be reasoned with but you.
Because removing them is rocket surgery?
If you look for other posts in this thread, they are different because they have been caught more.
The problem is the reader doesn't want to think.
Really? And you know this because Aliens whispered in your ear? You regularly commune with mushrooms and have gained deity status? Those voices in your head keep telling you so?
When you begin your opinion with a false generalization, anything else you say should be dismissed. _YOU_ may not want to think, but don't project your virtues (or lack thereof) onto everyone else.
Could you rephrase that argument to make sense? You claimed that Trump is not a moron, which I do understand. You also claimed he has philosophies, which I've been unable to perceive. As far as the rest....
Simplest way is by example: Trump "We need to protect our borders!" Opposition "He's a racist!"
There is no argument, just an ad hominem attack. Instead of discussing the actual issues that have been around since the 1960s and coming to a solution, the Left continues to proclaim "Racist" and cherry picks anything they can to support their claim of racism, and the Right spends all it's time saying "no, it's not racist" and trying to demonstrate how the cherry picking is not correct.
I don't know where your philosophies are, but the US has a Constitution who's founders who believed very strongly in individual liberty and saw how power in a Governments hands destroys that individual liberty. The Federal Government is limited in power and supposed to be by design. That power has grown enormously over the last 40 years. The "Right" (read not Fox, but people who believe in individual liberty) have been, and are, pushing back against those encroachments of power. We now have an administrative State and Judicial branch which have more power than any of the 3 Constitutional branches of Government and zero accountability to the people. We can't vote them out because they are appointees, we can't vote on their laws because they don't ask and don't have to.
There are actually very few "Right" wing opinions. I can give you a few radio stations and authors (like Dennis Prager, Mark Levin), but those people don't have a National Media platform. A couple of those "Right" wingers may make brief and rare appearances on Fox, but you won't hear them quoted in NYT, WAPO, Huffpo, CNN, *NBC, or any other media outlet. People don't quote Friedman, they quote leftist economics and ignore Friedman. People don't quote the founders, they promote the politicians and elites that own them. In fact they denounce the founders.
Trump is not a moron. None of those in politics are morons. We may not be able to understand what they do or why, but they do things very intentionally.
CNN had to make a major retraction and had 3 journalists resign over the most recent retraction, but they have had numerous retractions and have numerous lawsuits pending for libel and slander. This is not including those that have been settled out of court, and resulted in other "journalist" resignations. CNN repeatedly quote stories from NYT and WAPO which have their own long list of retractions, and libel/slander cases.
CNN has also staged election questions, self admitted promoted politicians they like, and fed a candidate they liked election questions ahead of time so that they could prepare answers ahead of time (at least 1 that we know of).
CNN has been caught openly gatekeeping (Cuomo telling people it was illegal for them to read information from Wikileaks), Staging fake scenes of protests, staging fake crime scenes, lying about reporter locations and green screening "live" reports.
Funny that "Snopes" lists the most recently reported staging of a protests false because CNN claimed if was false. No bias in Snopes right?
Sources: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/..., https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/..., and you can google the others. Just make sure you omit "cnn.com" from the results. Google "cnn lies" and the links mostly point to CNN stories denying that they lied. No collusion involved, I know.. Google isn't part of the charade either...
The other problem is the "both sides" narrative doesn't work with the current media. Right wingers keep claiming NBC, CNN, The Washington Post, et al, are "left wing". Those of us on the left just don't see it.
No kidding? Does anyone really need to explain that to you? see "Confirmation Bias" and "Cognitive Dissonance".
A big problem today is that Fox does not usually present a "right" opinion either. They claim the left is wrong on some stuff, but the left wing opinion is the only one in play. This is called "Hegelian Dialectic" and Hegelism, which was employed by Germany, USSR, China, etc...
Simply thinking the current President is terrible does not make you the counter to the right wing media. Hell, the intelligent side of the right thinks he's a moron too, they just don't say it in public.
The intelligent people on the right don't call him a moron because that is not true. Just like the far left's claim of every "ist" and "phobe" you can find isn't true. The intelligent people on the right are concerned with his policies and the philosophies which form those policies.
It is impossible to discuss policies when trying to argue with people who's main argument is "he's a moron".
i'd wager that a fair number of people do not read the news to stay informed, but to reinforce the views they already hold.
That means exactly what I said above, that Journalism is dead. Journalism isn't supposed to be just presenting your opinion, or the opinion someone wants you to present. Journalism is supposed to be primarily obtaining and presenting the fullest set of facts possible so that the reader/listener can make up their own mind about an opinion with all of the facts journalism made available.
Even in the age of the video recorder everywhere catching people in media lying, we have very little real journalism. We have liars, and people catching the liars as the story. The truth is not present in either of those situations.
Pretty damn obvious when a post saying "one should read them all" gets moderated troll, and the name calling posts against Breitbart get moderated +5 insightful. Facts may hurt on occasion, but they are facts.
All of media today lies, plain and simple. CNN, and NBC have both been caught repeatedly fabricating, staging, and editing content to promote a narrative instead of performing actual journalism. Watch either of those 2 stations and you hear the half a set of fact they need to support the narrative they want you to hear and believe. Nothing more. Not unique to them, just the most obvious offenders.
It is the information vacuum which gives rise to sites like Infowars. They lie too! If you want to see how bad US media has become with propaganda, just read about the same topic on NYT and Breitbart and compare. Watch CNN and Fox and compare. Same subject, two separate sets of facts being discussed, and two completely different opinions being presented. Amazingly, they both tend to favor the leftist agenda.
Journalism in the US is dead, and has been for quite a while. The only difference between today and 10 years ago is that it's easier to see media caught in the act. Trust in Journalism is the only thing lower than approval for politicians.
It's not the bike riding that lefties get wrong, it's that they ideologically want to give more and more power to the Government. That comes from regulations, part of which is taxes.
TFA seems to believe that since they can't think of a purpose for masking, and that a single (in their words "cheapest money can" [I assume they meant] "buy") home router doesn't use masking, that it must be the end of a field that's been in HTML for as long as HTML has had a standard.. Training sessions, remote support sessions, documentation, and yes preventing shoulder surfing are all reasons that the password field type will probably never go away.
That is 4 people if you count goatse you insensitive clod!