It depends on how you define "media." But I think of it more as pre-packaged ideas (especially in electronic format) designed to elicit a response. The books that I mentioned are all part of a broad tradition of ideas and argument. While they make a definite point, people might reach different conclusion about their meaning. They're not really intended to provoke people to change their minds or take a course of action in the way that a newspaper editorial is.Basis?
It depends on how you define "media." But I think of it more as pre-packaged ideas (especially in electronic format) designed to elicit a response. The books that I mentioned are all part of a broad tradition of ideas and argument. While they make a definite point, people might reach different conclusion about their meaning. They're not really intended to provoke people to change their minds or take a course of action in the way that a newspaper editorial is.
Thanks for the feedback. It sounds like you disagree. Have a good day.Media is the plural of medium, and a medium is a form of communication between two or more people.
Where are you getting your definition from?
But what you said was. "Well I wish the Republicans would have the same level of accountability & no tolerance on sexual misconduct instead of fully endorsing it."
Two things. First, they endorsed moore, not tolerence of sexual misconduct. Second, there has been no proof nor conviction of sexual misconduct. Unless I personally know a man,
i.e. your statement was a straw man.
I can not take seriously any "he said, she said" claims against him that are vehemently denied. They need solid evidence and a conviction or they didn't happen. That is called justice.
Thanks for the feedback. It sounds like you disagree. Have a good day.
I do. I'm just not sure that we are progressing. If you like though, send me a PM and we'll discuss it further.And you have no interest in why I disagree?
That is called "legal justice". You will note that the conviction rate for sexual assault is "low". Now one could use a crescent wrench as a hammer and say "Well, clearly all these victims are lying" and that puts everything into a nice tight little bow. But then for SOME reason, you DO feel righteously justified in calling someone a LIAR instead of suggesting that perhaps this dude raped someone.But what you said was. "Well I wish the Republicans would have the same level of accountability & no tolerance on sexual misconduct instead of fully endorsing it."
Two things. First, they endorsed moore, not tolerence of sexual misconduct. Second, there has been no proof nor conviction of sexual misconduct. Unless I personally know a man, I can not take seriously any "he said, she said" claims against him that are vehemently denied. They need solid evidence and a conviction or they didn't happen. That is called justice.
Well, they almost did in 2004 until the third recount.
Only a 100+ votes I think seperated Rossi from Gregoire. Lots of voter fraud discovered later on. So I'm not sure Gregoire was legit.
It was funny how the election results were in question until the third count and Gregoire was on top. Then somehow it became legit. I hated hearing her talk on my Ferry ride every day. “Hi, I’m Chris Gregoire…” it made me want to puke.
My comment was directed towards media manipulation of the public. It's not about reading to understand the psyche of Trump or anyone else. Unlike time-tested books, information in the mass media is often pre-packaged and designed to elicit a planned reaction. Ideally, in reading material cut-off from the media, a person would form his own conclusions. There isn't any one book that explores all this, but the book that I mentioned earlier is a good start.
You proved that with the combined help of the national party, the national news media, Republican fratricide and a smear campaign based on unsubstantiated allegations of untoward behavior occurring 40 years ago you could win an election in Alabama. Winning at any cost, you destroyed your own party leadership in the process, you destroyed what little credibility the national news media had left, you destroyed due process and you destroyed the legacies of your best presidents of the last half century. Altogether, quite the impressive feat.
You have the next two years, until the 2020 election to try to hang on to that seat. Good luck.
Which words did you not understand? I’ll see if I can be of assistance.
The right needs to win every battle, but the left only needs to win once. The same thing was actually key to how Al Franken stole his election in the first place.
It's the way of things, enforced by the Republican establishment. Part of why they hate President Trump and those like him so much is that they are willing to fight fights which were supposed to have been conceded permanently to the Democrats. The establishment hates that, because it means that conservatives might actually end up conserving something, rather than just "nobly losing" in perpetuity.
Republicans control the house, the senate, and the presidency. They currently occupy 34 of the 50 seats for state governor. In my lifetime they have been 6 of the 9 presidents. Exactly where are they "losing in perpetuity"?
Name one issue of importance to the average Republican voter where Republicans have made any sort of progress whatsoever. I'm not talking about keeping the status quo or merely doing something less bad than the Democrats would have; I want actual progress.
As far as I can see, whether you look at defense of life, tradition, family, the average worker, the border, etc. it's all been a series of losses.
This is largely because even when establishment Republicans win elections, their voters still lose. You see, all the promises they made might interfere with their ability to win in the next election. This isn't the hill to die on and all that.
Hi hislegacy,
Well, let's start with 'informed'. The dictionary definition is:
in·formed
inˈfôrmd/
adjective
Your definition doesn't seem to match with this one, so you'll have to provide your definition when you use words that you aren't defining as the common dictionary defines. Your definition, quite honestly, seems to be more in line with one being 'misinformed'. I'm using that with the common dictionary definition.
- having or showing knowledge of a particular subject or situation.
"an informed readership"
synonyms: knowledgeable, enlightened, literate, educated; More
- (of a decision or judgment) based on an understanding of the facts of the situation.
"twenty-six young adults participated after giving informed consent"
You seem to believe that if people use news sources as their way of being informed that such is somehow not the right way to be informed. I disagree. There is a certain segment of our society that agrees with Donald Trump that news reports about him that aren't in keeping with his view of reality are 'fake' news sources. I disagree.
I believe that most journalists with the major news sources do check their source material and verify. Yes, there have been a very few cases where that doesn't seem to have been followed, but it isn't nearly on the scale that some would have us or want us to believe.
Donald Trump is doing his best to destroy our confidence in our news sources and that is ultimately going to be a bad thing. We need a free press that is able to ask and search for answers to questions and events. If we don't have such a thing, that's when people lose their ability to be informed.
But, I readily agree and admit that each one may establish their own basis of truth.
God bless you,
In Christ, ted
Which words did you not understand? I’ll see if I can be of assistance.
You proved that with the combined help of the national party, the national news media, Republican fratricide and a smear campaign based on unsubstantiated allegations of untoward behavior occurring 40 years ago you could win an election in Alabama. Winning at any cost, you destroyed your own party leadership in the process, you destroyed what little credibility the national news media had left, you destroyed due process and you destroyed the legacies of your best presidents of the last half century. Altogether, quite the impressive feat.
You have the next two years, until the 2020 election to try to hang on to that seat. Good luck.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?