The latest revelation of hidden video with John Bonifield of CNN by project Veritas points to a real problem in our news organizations. Something many of us have known for a long time. Can CNN survive this latest scandal? How can they report news with a straight face any longer?
The New York Times may be next...
Here is link to the story...shocking...
http://710wor.iheart.com/featured/mark- … -are-fake/
Not so shocking, since it was a hidden camera, and edited. Unless give entire unedited video link, it means nothing.
You should know of all people - how taking snippets out of context can change the meaning.
So let me get this straight, you have no problem with CNN reporting on Russia for 16,000 times...
Irrespective of the video, what is the problem with CNN? That should be the topic. I wrote a hub on what is fake news. CNN is bordering on yellow journalism and tabloid paper.
Are you also having the same reaction to the hidden video on Planned Parenthood? The content of the video did not shock you but the fact it was a hidden video edited??? What about they discussing selling fetus parts for research...?
The videos were done by the same group.
Russia and Trump together are mentioned 214,000 times on FoxNews.com. Does that mean Fox News is finished too?
Ha! 214,000 times, that's a good one promisem. (Good point I mean)
I believe the etiquette is to not speak ill of the dead.
One guy saying "Russia this, Russia that" is not much of a scandal.
Not quite sure what the video says. I don't know how they would get him to discuss this topic and admit what he did.
But about CNN - an entire network "dedicated" to news is really amusing. They show the same clips over and over and everything that happens is a sensational breaking news event. I'm not sure how they have survived this long. But they've become such a conglomerate that if they were to collapse, it would probably have a catastrophic economic effect.
Doubt it. O'keefe and his project Veritas have been exposed numerous times for fraudulent claims and video editing manipulation. They've been taken to court and lost. That's probably why CNN responded to their accusations with LOL.
Probably why Democrats money chasers are suing Veritas for millions , Can't have that vigilance for any media integrity running around unhinged , unchecked .
Just Why do liberals .....really ....hate free speech so much ?
Don't care if he's on the left or right. He's a scumbag that hides behind and abuses the 1st amendment rights. He's a proven con who has done jail time for his actions and has been proven in a court law to have manipulated his videos to slander others. For me, rhis guy is crying wolf...except the real wolf hasn't -- and probably will not-- show.
Your "real wolf " Is the media of today , slanderous , libelous , sensationalizing , destroying careers , buying access , lying to sell the rag media "Pravda " media educated in Princeton , Harvard , Georgetown ................
Why is it that liberals like you justify your twisted media and defend its destruction of America ?
First off, look up that snot nose O'Keefe. It's all there...court records and so forth.
Secondly, pulling out the liberal card doesn't help when the argument. In fact, it makes you look ignorant on the topic.
And finally stick to the subject instead of name-calling. You might not what I have say, but you'd be better person for it. You may even stop following ideologies and start thinking for yourself.
It was your ideology that lost contact with media reality , Now ? .........What you want your Hilary inspired honesty back...........?
Shoes on the other foot now. Get over it .
Am I arguing with a 5 year old? Seriously?
Dean , Sometimes reality really is that simple . Your once honored news media is now the laughing stock of the world . Your once powerful DNC has effectively dissolved into nothing , and your collective political response is to resort to denying EVEN more truth and reality .
Media bias caused your entire political defeat , in response you collectively "dig the hole deeper" ?
Keep up the whining however , it looks good on you .
Why do you keep saying 'you' & 'your' as if anybody who disagrees with you must be a ' pony-tailed, NY Times-reading traitorous, Birkenstock-wearing thumbsucker'?
I'm not referring to the news media. IM talking about a known Huckster that you seemingly hold in high esteem. Is it possible to stay on topic rather than give some typical talking point that's as stall as 5 day old bread? Can you give a response that's not childish and ffull of false accusations? If you can't then it only tells me you don't really have much to say. And by the way, what's up with the whining accusations? From what you've written so far, it sounds like projection on your part. As an old saying goes if one wrestle with fools, then others will have a hard time telling the two. And I'm in no mood to wrestle.
What you should then be in the" mood "for , not that I really care as you've proved so little so far , is learning to discern truth from what CNN is selling you in your click media hysteria . All the left so far has proven is that you don't like Trump . Zero in the way of guilt in any B.S. leftist accusations , Sad part is;
--You know it
--CNN knows it
--The world knows it
But hey , keep up the great opposition , it sells good on campus.
Like I thought: you don't have an argument. And you are in total deniel of it. You can't give give me a coherent argument without resorting to the same tired left/right insult. You're a follower who will embrace the darkness. As a free thinker I'll grasp the light and discover new horizons...and that's why I won't get suckered by some over pampered man child who never knew what the word truth means. Oh. And I won't be fooled by O'Keefe BS, either.
So what then does an intelligent guy like yourself think of the recent Harvard study on media bias ?
Anyone that can't see that , right or left , lives in a different universe .
Oh you mean those horrible Ive League Elites that you hate so much?
You know what your problem is , all of the left today seems to have a small realm of ideological understanding . And a smaller realm of political maturity . What is it with liberals , everything is it all black or all white but no grey ?
Seriously dude , add a little content ?
I did just that:
Scam artist James O’Keefe is back with a CNN “exposé” — and Republicans just can’t say no
Every O'Keefe video has turned out to be phony propaganda — but he tells Republicans what they want to hear - http://www.salon.com/2017/06/29/scam-ar … nt-say-no/
Acorn, National Public Radio, Planned Parenthood ..
Mr. Bonifield, doesn’t work for the news and politics department at CNN. out of Atlanta, not Washington or New York where CNN’s political coverage originates. Ultimately, Bonifield isn’t saying anything any Trumpster Fan would say.
What Project veritas does is expose the hypocracy of these left organizations.
How else will they get this information? Do you think planned parenthood, Acorn and these other organizations will tell you what they are really doing?
They are doing the work of whistleblowers. Unfortunately, we have too little of these brave souls willing to put their job and pension on the line.
What we desperately need is transparency. These groups are getting government funds to do things that are unAmerican IMHO. Why should we the people fund these groups? I have no problem with you and all ypur liberal friends getting together and donate to all these progressive causes... but don't force our tax dollars to be used for these social engineering experiments.
Do you agree with all that they do? Or are you complaining that they've been exposed? Or are you saying they are being misaligned? Have any of these groups come out and challenge these hidden videos? As far as I know, once released, some low paying staff was fired or demoted... they have not changed their underlying policy...have they?
It is like wiki leaks exposing the DNC hacked emails...
They do not contest the content or truth of these emails...they just complain that they were illegally gotten and released to damage their presidential run... yeh ! Good job of wikileaks. I would want more not less. That is the only way I know of keeping them in check. They are doing the job of the media who refuse to cover them... sad
O'Keefe and his band of misfits didn't do the planned parent fiasco. That person is now up on charges and will be in court soon. But, lets not let O'Keefe off the hook just yet. Let's just say that he is nothing more than a fraud. What wasn't reported when he did his little "sting" of ACORN, was that some of the people he secretly taped actually played along and called the cops on him after he left their office (it's documented). What he told them was so vile, that they strongly suspected (without knowing what his true intent was) he was planning to start an illegal operation (pimping).
One of the ACORN official shown in the video sued and won a case against this "exposer of hypocrisy". And to make things even more ridiculous, he went onto Fox News dressed like the Hollywood version of a pimp and claimed that was the attire he wore during his sting. Nope. That too didn't turn out to be true. In court deposition it was revealed he showed up dressed like a yuppie (in suit and tie) and started asking outrageous claims. In some cases, he and his project veritas went to several headquarters and were basically kicked out because they smelled a rat.
Now it's true his heavily edited and very suggestive videos led to that organization's demise...after all, there were a few senators that were looking for any excuse to close them down.
What's surprising is that this person has been exposed time and time again, but he appears to get away with it. As I mentioned to someone else, all he's doing is playing to a base that desperately wants to believe the claims he wants., but the rest of the world is watching him and his group.
One question I like to know about him is this: Where does he get his funding. This guy has had to pay 6 figures numerous times in the past for slandering his victims.
He's no hero. Just another manipulator playing to an ideological base.
Between project veritas and CNN or the NYT, I believe in project veritas and what they are doing...exposing the main street media for bias and exposing some progressive organizations such as ACORN and Planned Parenthood of illegal activities.
What we need in this country is more whistleblowers to step up and expose corruption ever where. See something say something...
Here is the demise of ACORN -
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Associa … Reform_Now
Perhaps CNN will be next?
Sorry, CNN isn't going anywhere. Latest polls suggests that people trust them over trump.... now with project veritas: I've said it once and I will say it again -- they've manufactured the controversy. They lied...pure and simple. Say what you want about cnn or nyt. If they reported a false story or one with no verifiable sources, they will retract it, apologize and even fire those involved.they may not report the stuff you want to hear or read, but they don't systematically polish a turd and then call themselves the "whistleblowers" of the 1st amendment. A polished turd is still a turd no matter how you look at it.
Dean, I guess we will have to agree to disagree. The news cannot be treated as yellow journalism. You can't report on some rumor and then retract it. People read headlines and sensations but ignore corrections... you know that don't you?
With regard to veritas and other hidden videos, I am glad they did what they did. Let the people judge what went down. It is clear to me some of these organizations abuse their power and sometimes when they get caught, they choose to attack the whistleblower rather than address their own behavior. In a perfect world, we would not need whistleblowers. Yet, we know we don't live in a perfect world.
Don't take my word for it. but here is http://www.politico.com/blogs/on-media/ … lat-235307
Are you going to still say to "agree to disagree" and "let the people decide" or dismiss politico?
O'Keefe is known for his deceptive editing and questionable tactics. Sort of like the comedy show "The Daily Show" where they edit to make the person they are interviewing sound stupid. Except in this case Veritas is trying to present itself as 'real news' - which it isn't.
O'Keefe made clear the audio he obtained featured lower-level staffer at the network.
O'Keefe is calling on volunteers to comb through the 119 hours of raw tape, and is offering a $10,000 reward of "content that exposes media malfeasance."
Wait - I though O'keefe "did' that - it not - then why offer a 10k reward if he has already done so?
While his undercover activism has received criticism for its deceptive editing and unethical means throughout the years, James O’Keefe was just caught attempting to bribe people to riot at the upcoming Trump inauguration.
The plan to bribe rioters, record them, and blame progressives for inciting violence at the inauguration was stopped by two counter-sting undercover groups who surreptitiously recorded O’Keefe’s Project Veritas organization offering large sums of money in exchange for rioting. - http://www.peacock-panache.com/2017/01/ … 27736.html
O’Keefe operative Allison Maass (a/k/a Allison Brandt) can be heard claiming that she has a donor who is willing to spend big to disrupt the Inaugurations, - http://www.snopes.com/2017/01/18/dueling-stings/
_____________So you keep believing ___________________________
Such faith is worthy of praise (not!)
The guy didn't really say anything that anybody doesn't already know. If there was any proof we'd have moved on to a different phase. No one with any personal integrity would think this was anything other than an extended fishing expedition by our government with the media throwing chum in the water to hope that the public can be made to smell something rotten; by those who would like to see Trump fall.
The investigation into Russian meddling in the election may or may not reveal any wrongdoing on the part of Trump or his campaign or administration. Are you suggesting the investigation be dropped before it is complete? I believe the Benghazi probes, for example, took almost three years to complete, and I believe that was a far less complex disaster. I'm not sure how much time was spent on Clinton's emails, but I'm pretty sure you wanted the investigation to come to a conclusion, right?
I'm confused about why you would think this one should end before the investigation is complete.
Lastly, I'm perplexed that Trump seems unconcerned about the Russian meddling in our election, that is, until the recent revelations about what Obama knew and the contention that Obama should have done more. When that was revealed, Trump inexplicably contradicted himself and criticized Obama for not doing enough to retaliate. What is Trump doing to retaliate? He has never even admitted he believed the 17 intelligence agencies who said the meddling occurred. Oh, except that accusing Obama of not doing anything about it is, in itself, an implicit admission that it occurred.
Maybe you can enlighten me about all this? I find it very confusing.....
No. The investigation should run its course. I have no idea how you got that out of my comment.
Really? No idea how I got that? I apologize for my mis-reading of your assessment of the investigation.
"No one with any personal integrity would think this was anything other than an extended fishing expedition by our government with the media throwing chum in the water to hope that the public can be made to smell something rotten; by those who would like to see Trump fall."
If that is what you think it is, why would you, with your personal integrity, wish this investigation to continue to waste time, resources and millions of taxpayer dollars?
I'm still confused, I guess....
You are confused. Sadly, fishing expeditions can produce results. There is that hope that something will be found. Nothing has been, thus far, but it doesn't take evidence of a crime for the government to open an investigation on a politician. Or, are you saying Hillary was guilty of crimes since she was investigated?
I think if you think about this your confusion will disappear.
I think Benghazi was worthy of an investigation, maybe not seven, but at least one. And, no, I don't think Hillary was guilty of crimes just because she was investigated. I specifically said I don't know if Trump is guilty of anything, either, so I don't know why you even brought that up.
However, you did state "No one with any personal integrity would think this was anything other than an extended fishing expedition by our government with the media throwing chum in the water to hope that the public can be made to smell something rotten; by those who would like to see Trump fall."
Then, you stated the investigation should run its course.
So, since I assume you have personal integrity, you must think that this investigation is nothing but a fishing expedition? Yet, you want it to run its course. Maybe I am wrongly assuming that "fishing expeditions" are a bad thing? Maybe you think they're okay?
Anyway, it doesn't really matter. The investigation will run its course and we will eventually find out what happened and who was involved and whether or not any crime was committed and by whom.
I would say those who can't see past their liberal or conservative ideologies would find it difficult to understand my comments.
I'm sure you're right, because you are, of course, completely unbiased.
http://hubpages.com/politics/forum/1417 … ost2893667
I'm sure you can do better than that because I stand by that comment. It has nothing to do with democrats vs. republicans or liberal vs. conservative. It has to do with one of the dirtiest couples in politics during our life times.
It has to do with assigning guilt (for murder, even) that hasn't been proven while claiming that others are doing the same to Trump.
Well, Trump is fairly new to the scene. I've watched the Clinton's dirty deeds for years and years and years. I'm afraid I will say, again, that this has nothing to do with politics except that the Clintons are in politics. I suppose if there were enough circumstantial evidence against Trump over the same period of time that it has built up against the Clintons I'd be inclined to buy into his guilt also. What we have here, so far, are allegations. I think the investigation should go on. It will either clear his name or substantiate the allegations. I think we have a better chance of getting to the truth about Trump than we ever had with the Clintons.
So, you believe the Clinton body count grew by one this year? I think colorfulone said it was 92, but that was so last year.
I don't know PP. I do know that we saw the government attempt to run interference for Hillary during the email inquiry. Who knows what goes on behind the scenes and who gets away with what in our government. 92 dead? Who knows. But, I'll tell you. Someone in the government had to be involved in the Kennedy assassination. Nothing makes sense on that one.Why would we not accept that sometimes government officials get away with murder?
I can agree that it is possible government officials have gotten away with murder. Of course, you have a right to believe and say Clinton killed 92 people, or a bunch of people, or one person, but be prepared to defend yourself, since no Clinton has ever been investigated or tried for murder.
Also, it's a bit hypocritical to criticize those who believe Trump or his associates might have been involved in wrongdoing when you propagate unsubstantiated accusations yourself.
There is no crime or potential crime in this Russian investigation. The CNN video clearly indicated that they do not believe there is a real story just kept it alive for ratings and to cater to their base...
The Benghazi affair was real and 4 people died and Obama officials lied to the American people on numerous occasions which in turn exposed the Hillary private email server, also an alleged crime of violating security of secret files...even though Comey decided upon himself it was not indictable...
When will this insanity end?
How do you know if there is no crime if the investigation has not concluded? There may very well be no crime, but how do you know that already?
That is not how traditional investigation begins...
Usually there is an alleged criminal statue that is violate.
Then, an investigation starts...
People are interviewed under oath and info gathered...
It works its way up the chain to the top person, mastermind...
In this case, there was none of that. It started with leaks by insiders, anonymous at that...
Fake stories were generated and propagated.
The Russian dossier was completely fabricated by an MI 6 ex-agent.
Comey himself leaked to get the special prosecutor appointed.
What is the underlying alleged crime?
Look at it this way. Put on your thinking hat.
After 6 months of this stuff, with all the leaking by insiders who knew,...
If there was anything of substance, wouldn't i have come out by now... one way or another.
The fact that none has appeared tells me - there is no story, no crime.
It was a distraction to stop Trump.
The American people see it for what it is. That is why the democratic leaders are calling it off.
It is not working and in fact hurting themselves as obstructionists.
You do know that the investigation is about Russian meddling in the election, which 17 intelligence agencies agree happened?
No, we have no evidence of a "crime" from any U.S. individual. However, the investigation is continuing, and to say no crime has occurred before the investigation is complete is, well, absurd.
Does it really matter? How many?
The investigations was a sham from the start.
Not one eyewithness on the ground was interviewed or testified. How come?
Hillary and Obama and susan rice and ben rhodes came up with the video story to explain the attack as spontaneous...
4 Americans died without any help coming... 13 hours...
Someone gave the stand down order, but no one was found guilty of any crime or incompetance.
The one shining point was the revelation of hillary using her own email server which was against the law...and apparently all knew about it including Obama.
She had to erase all the data to hide her crime. Obstruction?
Her intent was obvious to hide her actions free from FOIA requests...
Yet, Comey said there was no intent...???
So, as we all know by now, the whole thing was fixed from the beginning.
It concluded with Bill Clinton meeting Loretta Lynch on the tarmac.
The rich and powerful play by a different rule than you and I.
Well, I believe if we are going to use them as a basis for an argument, experts etc, we should know exactly who they are, what they said, what the proof is etc. Hey I mean, if Langley says its true its gotta be information they would stand by. Or they or them whoever.
That's what the investigation is doing, but you knew that.
But what if they is them, though. Itsa tricky business like that. They are not in the business of telling stuff.
They will tell stuff to a special investigator, because they are required to. But you knew that, too, didn't you?
I am not at liberty to discuss what I know or dont. Id have to see your papers even if I was. You could be one of them.
It does surprise me that all these intelligence communities/agencies whathaveyou are so chatty cathy about all that " meddlin ".
I would think the KGB would have better things to do or have been better at " meddlin " into Podestas Spiritcooking recipes without getting caught passing on such highly sensitive classified material. I guess that was the best they could do. Best they could come up with. Times have changed. Agencies of low expectations.
Whatever. Your opinion versus what the investigation uncovers.....hmmmm, which one should I go with....?
We'll see. Perhaps you will be proven to be so much smarter than the smartest super spy and we will all tremble before your gloriously, spectaculary (the BEST!) knowledge of this whole rinky-dink affair.
So, you believe it was highly salient, important, invaluable information, a veritable treasure trove, procurred and released by professionals. The intelligence agency of Russia. Except it is apparent it wasn't and they weren't. But, other than that or those...
I wonder if the KGB now knows the ingredients to kfc's chicken or how to make Coca Cola. Im gonna follow assange on the twitter. I may find out how they make play dough.
Me too! Once back in 78'. I thought I was mistaken about something, but I was wrong.
Russia and many other countries are always meddling in our elections and we do the same to other countries as well. Are you so naive to think this stuff does not go on? The real question is did Trump and his associates have anything to do with any of it?
If anything, the investigation should be of the Obama administration because, any illegal activities happened under his watch... where was his intelligence, the NSA, the CIA and the FBI...
Aren't they capturing all the metadata of all comunications...
Why don't they have a better handle on all this spying...?
To try and tie this to Trump is rediculous. He was a private citizen running for office.
I'm sure all of that you mentioned is being investigated, since it is relevant to the Russian meddling. That is the whole point. It won't be tied to Trump, unless the investigation shows that it is. We don't yet know everything. So, to categorically state that you know the result of this investigation is that there is no crime, is absurd.
As far as what countries have and have not done, I personally have no idea. But what I do know is that U.S. intelligence agencies agree that Russia meddled to a greater extent than ever before in the 2016 election and that it is a threat to our electoral process and must be stopped. I am glad there is an investigation and I await its results.
Your position would have more credibility if this investigation was started a year ago, during the 2016 election cycle when this info first came to light.
It was ignored by the Obama administration, until Trump unexpectedly won. How convenient?
As for election interference, I am surprised you did not call for investigating the DNC...
They actually did collude with the media and others to prevent Sanders a fair shot at the primaries...
How come that is acceptable for you?
If you're talking about the special investigation now underway by Mueller, that happened because of Trump's own actions. If you're talking about the investigation into the Russian meddling in the election, that did begin before Obama left office. I believe a report was delivered to him in January. Look it up and correct me if I am wrong.
I never said what the DNC did was acceptable to me. Where did you get that?
What's shocking about this? They're covering what gets them ratings... that seems kind of like common sense, no? I don't watch the news but unless they're straight up lying about information I don't see the issue (other than being terribly repetitive). The guy doesn't say anything about fabricating stories, rather following a story that may or may not have anything to it. I thought that was kind of common knowledge already.
As for Planned Parenthood, context was very important in those videos as it should be in any videos. The research companies "buying" the fetal tissue are covering the costs of preservation, transportation, etc. - not actually paying for the tissue itself. It's an important distinction to make but of course these kinds of sources don't care to make it because it causes more hysteria and outrage if they leave it out. Kind of exactly like what they're accusing CNN of doing, hmm...
50 years of cold war, I am surprised the ruskies havent tried this before. Because if they had, it would been on all the tv stations. 24/7 x infinity. PT Barnum was right.
It would only be on the tv stations if they were caught....
If ya think about it, Podesta is like Rosenberg. Spiritcooking is like the Manhattan Project.
wikileaks = spam folder lool
https://www.osti.gov/opennet/manhattan- … ionage.htm
When I consider the point of what the video showed, I would have thought 'confirming' rather than "shocking" would have been your first thought.
Anyone that watches CNN can easily see they have an anti-Trump bias. And if they watch CNN frequently they are probably not surprised about that "16,000" Russia stories number.
They would also know that CNN has reported nothing more than innuendo and speculation, because no "smoking gun" facts have been found - yet.
For a non-trump supporter, this probably isn't a problem. And for a Trump supporter, it probably isn't news.
So what was so shocking?
Hopefully you considered that the CNN guy portrayed as a "supervising producer," (as if he had a hand in CNN's Trump story coverage), was a "supervising producer" of a CNN medical coverage group. which would mean that, although he may be able to speak from knowledge of the news section production, and programming agenda, he is still voicing, (as CNN has said), his personal opinion.
ps. but I do agree this is another black-eye for CNN.
I agree it's a black eye for CNN. Do you think it's a bigger or smaller black eye than Fox retracting the Seth Rich murder conspiracy story?
CNN is such a middle of the road outfit. Trump has really enabled extremism with his fake news BS. And he has done it by tapping into the many kinds of madness that fester in the minds of so many Americans.
It has been a revelation to me. I could never have imagined that such a sophisticated nation could be so easily manipulated.
It is scary too, like a real life 'Invasion of the Body Snatchers'. And it is just about the desperation of certain industries to escape scrutiny by professional investigators so they can make a little more money.
The most banal motives have driven a whole country into a kind of coma.
Knowledge is only valuable if the information is accurate and percieved objectively. If the judgement is not sound, there is no value. CNN is this and FOX is that. I dont watch much news or tv. I certainly would never substitute critical thinking and allow the idiot box to do it for me.
The Russians are hacking the world and its a conspiracy of "desperate industries " evading investigation and CNN Is the scapegoat.
Begging the coma question.
Anyone foolish enough to take one news source as his or her guide to the world is going to be living in a fantasy land.
Even organisations that set the highest journalistic standards (and there are a few) will get a lot of stuff wrong, simply because there is always a time pressure.
Real News !
That manipulation however , was targeted and was received willingly by the younger , the naive , and the shallow voting believer in fake news , What was incredible is that the mainstream electing , moral majority saw through it easily and willingly rejected it all . The Trump victory proved that the the real America saw through all the BS.
You should be thankful .
Found out why 'fly over' America will never have their minds changed. I take it that you are a white old man living in rural mid-west America. So arguing or teaching anything is merely self delusion on my part.
http://www.rawstory.com/2017/06/fundame … er-change/
"The problem is rural America doesn’t understand itself and will NEVER listen to anyone outside their bubble. It doesn’t matter how “understanding” you are, how well you listen, what language you use…if you are viewed as an outsider, your views are automatically discounted. I’ve had hundreds of discussions with rural white Americans and whenever I present them any information that contradicts their entrenched beliefs, no matter how sound, how unquestionable, how obvious, they WILL NOT even entertain the possibility it might be true. Their refusal is a result of the nature of their fundamentalist belief system and the fact I’m the enemy because I’m an educated liberal.
Another problem with rural, Christian, white Americans is they are racists. I’m not talking about white hood-wearing, cross-burning, lynching racists (though some are). I’m talking about people who deep down in their heart of hearts truly believe they are superior because they are white. Their white God made them in his image and everyone else is a less-than-perfect version, flawed and cursed."
This story above was written by a white guy who grew up in the mid-west and then moved to the coast - so - perhaps he's not prejudicial as as born and bred city slicker.
Your comments are very similar and apply to many liberal progressives as well. I will debate you anytime any place on issues and I live in the suburb of NY. I an a conservative and I sympathize with the flyover country. The silent majority is no longer silent. I am serious. Pick any current topic and we can start.
If you don't mind, I would even start a hub on this on-going debate and present both sides. You will have full access to the content and I will give you credits...
The race and gender and sex politics are so divisive.
Why can't we stick to issues that are for all people and benefit all people?
"I’ve had hundreds of discussions with rural white Americans and whenever I present them any information that contradicts their entrenched beliefs, no matter how sound, how unquestionable, how obvious, they WILL NOT even entertain the possibility it might be true. "
You've presented them with information...or with personal opinion?
"...people who deep down in their heart of hearts truly believe they are superior because they are white. Their white God made them in his image and everyone else is a less-than-perfect version, flawed and cursed."
(I, too, have had hundreds of conversations with rural, white people and not a single one has ever told me that their white god etc. etc. Conclusion is that this is made up opinion, not fact.)
Maybe its so deep down in their heart of hearts you missed it? Nah, this loony tunes x 2
But it makes such a fine case, if we just put all conservatives, all the religious into the same basked as the KKK, skinheads and Westboro baptists! Perhaps we should do the same for Islamic terrorists, atheists and liberals - it makes equally good sense, after all.
I just met a couple who transformed from conservative fundamentalist Christians to liberal Democrats. Why? Because their church and their friends (all of whom were members of the same church) turned their backs on them when their daughter revealed she felt like a boy and wanted to eventually become male.
Their story is heart wrenching, slowly coming to the horrible realization that the love of God apparently did not extend to them anymore, as one by one their friends deserted them because they wouldn't properly "discipline" their child. They are caring, loving people and they now believe their experience with their daughter was the impetus to escape the brainwashing of the church and insular nature of conservative culture.
They told me they are grateful that their experience opened their eyes to the underlying hatefulness of religion and the level to which many people will stoop to defend their long-held beliefs in the face of reality.
PrettyPanther, I truly can 'feel' for the couple you speak of. And I am aware that it is typically the "Right" that is associated with the behavior in your story. But, to attribute it to Right or Left, GOP or Democrat is wrong. At least I think so. Small-minded hypocrites come in all stripes.
I think your story is more of an indictment of organized religion than political association.
ps. yep, it's a martini night. I really get pissed at examples of how shallow, (a la ahorseback), some in our species can be.
Here's a tangential question. Do you think we have always been this way, and our development of instant communications is just highlighting it, or is this a new aspect of our society?
You guys haven't seen the CNN produced movie ?
"The Election Day that Russians Attacked America and There Were No Russians " recently released ?
CNN once the pride of the news media , now The Clinton News Network ? That CNN ?
Is that the movie about Russia? I heard it was filmed in Russia.
But seriously though, I guess we will have to wait for a proper investigation, that it was Russia, and then for them to tell CNN, it was Russia, then to tell us, it was Russia. The suspense is killing me.
cnn is a liberal sugar teat. A soros playbook for the easily duped.
The Americans in my part of the world are pretty easy going characters for the most part and range from California liberals to born again 'have you been saved' eccentrics. They all drink a lot, apart from the conspiracy theorists who probably fear the spaceships will take them if they ever let their guard down.
Then there is 'Oakie John' who is a bear-sized and semi-psychopathic. He makes the South Africans look like models of tolerance. His friends are martial arts fiends and to be avoided. Apparently this is the result of land-locked state syndrome (so the Californians tell me).
We also have a lecturer from Arizona, who is bipolar and shares intimate pictures of his anatomy when he forgets to take his medication.
I'm fond of the young women from Michigan. They smile like Canadians and actually know how to have a good time.
On the whole, the sea seems to have a civilizing influence on people, but maybe big lakes do the trick, too.
I have a suggestion for CNN - if they want to be a relevant news source going forward.
Drain the swamp and fire all their anchors.
Go back to joirnalism school and hire some new journalists that are trained in the basics of journalism 101. Report the news and not make news.
Keep your own bias to yourself. Everyone of us have bias. It does not belong in the newsroom. In the opinion column, by all means, make your case. Make it clear it is an opinion and not news.
Why do I as a citizen have to remind the media their first responsibility is to the truth. Without credibility, they are nothing but yellow journalism.
Sorry for butting in, but I found a http://reason.com/ like - yesterday only because I was looking for unbiased news. have an interesting article @ http://reason.com/archives/2017/07/05/i … t-believes
"Just as the president has trouble distinguishing between negative press coverage and "fake news," the journalists who cover him tend to treat every inaccurate, unfounded, or even debatable statement he makes as a lie. That mistake, to which I myself am sometimes prone, clouds the judgment and damages the credibility of reporters and commentators who aspire to skepticism but too often settle for reflexive disbelief. ... The Times clearly falls short of them when it reports as fact something that is fundamentally unverifiable: the president's state of mind when he says things that are inconsistent with reality. Pointing out the inconsistency is fair and necessary in reporting the news; reaching a conclusion about the president's motive is neither."
by Jack Lee 3 years ago
In discussions here on HubPages, a common topic arises when discussing the media. In most circles, people believes what they read and see on TV. That is why we Conservatives don't trust the media for providing the truth...because we know who we are and the media is mis characterizing conservatives...
by Sharlee 17 months ago
CNN’s Jim Sciutto is in hot water for an anti-Trump report which the CIA and the White House condemned and deny.Jim Sciutto is under fire after the Central Intelligence Agency condemned his report that aired yesterday. The report claimed the CIA was forced to extract a CIA spy from Russia due to...
by Kenna McHugh 6 weeks ago
CNN Announces More Layoffs as Zucker Reveals Network is Losing $10 Million a Yearhttps://summit.news/2019/05/28/cnn-anno … ion-a-year
by Readmikenow 7 months ago
This is an example of the politicization of news by the left. Thousands of people in Berlin, Germany protested against their country's covid-19 restrictions. The NY Post reported the facts. CNN reported it with a political slant. The difference is amazing.The story from the...
by Kenna McHugh 22 months ago
I had to post this here because it is so cool. CNN reputation is poor for accurate reporting, so finally, the public is catching on. https://www.forbes.com/"...the network saw its prime time lineup drop 26% in April compared to the same month one year ago. CNN's total audience in prime time...
by IslandBites 18 months ago
@FoxNews is letting millions of GREAT people down! We have to start looking for a new News Outlet. Fox isn’t working for us anymore! -DTSomeone's been unhappy with their polls lately. "Fox News isn’t supposed to work for you," Fox senior political analyst Brit Hume replied on...
Copyright © 2021 HubPages Inc. and respective owners. Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners. HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc. HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.
HubPages Inc, a part of Maven Inc.
|HubPages Device ID||This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel||This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.|
|Remarketing Pixels||We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels||We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.|