Catholics should not vote for Hillary
Forum rules
1) This is a Christian site, respect our beliefs and we will respect yours.
2) This is a family friendly site, no swearing or posting offensive links, pictures, or signatures.
3) Please be respectful of others.
4) Trolls are not welcome and will be dealt with accordingly.
5) No racial comments, jokes or images
6) If you see a dead thread over 6 months old, let it rest in peace
7) No Duplicate posts
1) This is a Christian site, respect our beliefs and we will respect yours.
2) This is a family friendly site, no swearing or posting offensive links, pictures, or signatures.
3) Please be respectful of others.
4) Trolls are not welcome and will be dealt with accordingly.
5) No racial comments, jokes or images
6) If you see a dead thread over 6 months old, let it rest in peace
7) No Duplicate posts
- ccgr
- Site Admin
- Posts: 38657
- Joined: Wed May 25, 2005 12:00 am
- Are you human?: Yes!
- Location: IL
- Contact:
I thought it was standard procedure to blame the previous administration. Obama railed on Bush's policies as soon as he took office.
- Comotto
- Senior Member
- Posts: 336
- Joined: Sun Dec 07, 2014 12:55 pm
- Location: Central Florida
- Contact:
Just one difference, Bush left us on the precipice of financial ruin!
CARZ
CARZ
- Sstavix
- CCGR addict
- Posts: 2950
- Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2012 5:47 am
- Are you human?: Yes!
- Location: Eastern Washington. Not the crazy side.
- Contact:
I agree with EchoDelta. Salon leans so far to the left that they make The Onion look like a legitimate news source. But the article mentions nothing about Donald Trump or his supposed affiliation to the "far right" movement.
The article itself is flawed as well. Although it specifically identifies many of the atrocities committed by Islamic extremists (e.g. the World Trade Center, the Orlando nightclub), the only domestic terror incident it reports is the Oklahoma City bombing - and even the charts admit that those casualties were not factored in to their conclusions. The article doesn't cite a single example of "far right terrorism" since then, but makes plenty of vague generalities.
And it's probably because this generalization obscures the real perpetrators of these crimes - if they exist. For example, it does claim that neo-Nazi skinheads are perpetrators of some of these crimes. However, the Nazis - or "National Socialists," if you do your research to learn their origins - are actually big-government leftists, rather than right-wingers who want less government interference in their lives. Are they anti-government? Of course... because they want the government to have more power than it already has. That isn't a "right wing" approach by any means.
Given that your source probably classifies anyone who identifies as Republican - or definitely Libertarian, like me - as "far right," I would say that your argument is invalid, and can be dismissed accordingly.
tl;dr Don't cite Salon.com as evidence for any argument. When it comes to "fake news," they're up there at the top of the list.
The article itself is flawed as well. Although it specifically identifies many of the atrocities committed by Islamic extremists (e.g. the World Trade Center, the Orlando nightclub), the only domestic terror incident it reports is the Oklahoma City bombing - and even the charts admit that those casualties were not factored in to their conclusions. The article doesn't cite a single example of "far right terrorism" since then, but makes plenty of vague generalities.
And it's probably because this generalization obscures the real perpetrators of these crimes - if they exist. For example, it does claim that neo-Nazi skinheads are perpetrators of some of these crimes. However, the Nazis - or "National Socialists," if you do your research to learn their origins - are actually big-government leftists, rather than right-wingers who want less government interference in their lives. Are they anti-government? Of course... because they want the government to have more power than it already has. That isn't a "right wing" approach by any means.
Given that your source probably classifies anyone who identifies as Republican - or definitely Libertarian, like me - as "far right," I would say that your argument is invalid, and can be dismissed accordingly.
tl;dr Don't cite Salon.com as evidence for any argument. When it comes to "fake news," they're up there at the top of the list.
- Comotto
- Senior Member
- Posts: 336
- Joined: Sun Dec 07, 2014 12:55 pm
- Location: Central Florida
- Contact:
' Fake News' was coined and mastered by the current administration. It succeeded by making us focus on the trees and not the forest. We lack a clear and present danger, hence all the 'in' fighting. We don't need labels for groups, what's needed is a return to true discernment to separate the good seed from the bad. Love for one another, not hate, will abate dissension in our country.Sstavix wrote: Sat Mar 18, 2017 4:39 pm I agree with EchoDelta. Salon leans so far to the left that they make The Onion look like a legitimate news source. But the article mentions nothing about Donald Trump or his supposed affiliation to the "far right" movement.
The article itself is flawed as well. Although it specifically identifies many of the atrocities committed by Islamic extremists (e.g. the World Trade Center, the Orlando nightclub), the only domestic terror incident it reports is the Oklahoma City bombing - and even the charts admit that those casualties were not factored in to their conclusions. The article doesn't cite a single example of "far right terrorism" since then, but makes plenty of vague generalities.
And it's probably because this generalization obscures the real perpetrators of these crimes - if they exist. For example, it does claim that neo-Nazi skinheads are perpetrators of some of these crimes. However, the Nazis - or "National Socialists," if you do your research to learn their origins - are actually big-government leftists, rather than right-wingers who want less government interference in their lives. Are they anti-government? Of course... because they want the government to have more power than it already has. That isn't a "right wing" approach by any means.
Given that your source probably classifies anyone who identifies as Republican - or definitely Libertarian, like me - as "far right," I would say that your argument is invalid, and can be dismissed accordingly.
tl;dr Don't cite Salon.com as evidence for any argument. When it comes to "fake news," they're up there at the top of the list.
- Sstavix
- CCGR addict
- Posts: 2950
- Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2012 5:47 am
- Are you human?: Yes!
- Location: Eastern Washington. Not the crazy side.
- Contact:
True, but the propaganda being churned out by the "lamestream media" is nothing new. I haven't trusted the major media sources for decades now - partially because I used to work for a local newspaper, and saw how things worked behind the scenes. It's critically important to consider the source of any material you read, be it on the 'net or in print, because you shouldn't just blindly trust a news source just because it claims it is a legitimate news source.Comotto wrote: Mon Mar 20, 2017 4:34 am ' Fake News' was coined and mastered by the current administration.
- Comotto
- Senior Member
- Posts: 336
- Joined: Sun Dec 07, 2014 12:55 pm
- Location: Central Florida
- Contact:
Agreed it's nothing new, but this administration has raised it to the ridiculous level and shameful that our President is at the top! I think we're off topic, no longer spiritual in nature. Religiously, both candidates should have been stoned.Sstavix wrote: Mon Mar 20, 2017 4:46 amTrue, but the propaganda being churned out by the "lamestream media" is nothing new. I haven't trusted the major media sources for decades now - partially because I used to work for a local newspaper, and saw how things worked behind the scenes. It's critically important to consider the source of any material you read, be it on the 'net or in print, because you shouldn't just blindly trust a news source just because it claims it is a legitimate news source.Comotto wrote: Mon Mar 20, 2017 4:34 am ' Fake News' was coined and mastered by the current administration.

CARZ
- ArcticFox
- CCGR addict
- Posts: 3508
- Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2007 12:00 am
- Are you human?: Yes!
- Contact:
Not to nitpick, but this isn't correct. The term 'fake news' was first coined by Democrat-leaning news outlets after the election as a label to be used against Conservative news organizations that were being "blamed" for Trump's win. Congressional Democrats even went so far as to call for a list of "fake news" sites to be created, which of course included sites like Breitbart and Drudge.Comotto wrote: Mon Mar 20, 2017 4:34 am ' Fake News' was coined and mastered by the current administration.
Since the left-leaning mainstream news media is well known for being biased to the point of dishonesty, right wing commentators quickly seized the term and volleyed it back upon the left, and Trump simply picked that up and ran with it.
"He who takes offense when no offense is intended is a fool, and he who takes offense when offense is intended is a greater fool."
—Brigham Young
"Don't take refuge in the false security of consensus."
—Christopher Hitchens
—Brigham Young
"Don't take refuge in the false security of consensus."
—Christopher Hitchens
- Comotto
- Senior Member
- Posts: 336
- Joined: Sun Dec 07, 2014 12:55 pm
- Location: Central Florida
- Contact:
Ok, not coined but definitely mastered to infinity and beyond.ArcticFox wrote: Tue Mar 21, 2017 6:26 pmNot to nitpick, but this isn't correct. The term 'fake news' was first coined by Democrat-leaning news outlets after the election as a label to be used against Conservative news organizations that were being "blamed" for Trump's win. Congressional Democrats even went so far as to call for a list of "fake news" sites to be created, which of course included sites like Breitbart and Drudge.Comotto wrote: Mon Mar 20, 2017 4:34 am ' Fake News' was coined and mastered by the current administration.
Since the left-leaning mainstream news media is well known for being biased to the point of dishonesty, right wing commentators quickly seized the term and volleyed it back upon the left, and Trump simply picked that up and ran with it.
CARZ
- ArcticFox
- CCGR addict
- Posts: 3508
- Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2007 12:00 am
- Are you human?: Yes!
- Contact:
That's fair.Comotto wrote: Wed Mar 22, 2017 6:14 pm Ok, not coined but definitely mastered to infinity and beyond.
CARZ
Though personally, I'm loving it. It's about time the lefty media got called on it.
"He who takes offense when no offense is intended is a fool, and he who takes offense when offense is intended is a greater fool."
—Brigham Young
"Don't take refuge in the false security of consensus."
—Christopher Hitchens
—Brigham Young
"Don't take refuge in the false security of consensus."
—Christopher Hitchens