Civil discourse on gun control

[Frederick Foresight]

When you tell someone they have idiot slant pieces and then call them "full of it", you're going after the person.

If we are unable to be civil to each other, we can pick any number of other threads to call each other names.

Have a great day.

Please stop drawing me in by responding to my posts with accusations. I merely directed gwb's own comment where it belonged:

CNN is full of shiat.

And if someone presents idiot slant pieces as "evidence," what am I to call those idiot slant pieces? Civil discourse includes not trashing it up with falsehoods.

So let's just say goodbye in this thread. So, please, no more false accusations, and you won't hear from me here.

 

[gwb-trading]

I didn't attack gwb. I attacked his idiot slant pieces, none of which implicated CNN. In any event, I'll take my leave now.

All the pieces demonstrated CNN's behavior with documented evidence. You can believe them or not. But the pictures of audience members holding questions emailed to them by CNN "Your Question" are very telling.

Is the left wing next going to deny that CNN sent their debate questions to Donna Brazile who fed them to Hillary Clinton -- clearly violating all sorts of journalism standards for integrity.

CNN drops Brazile for feeding debate questions to Clinton
https://nypost.com/2016/10/31/cnn-drops-brazile-for-feeding-debate-questions-to-clinton/

On 31 October 2016, Democratic National Committee (DNC) interim chair Donna Brazile was fired from her position as a political commentator at CNN over e-mail leaks suggesting she had improperly supplied Hillary Clinton’s campaign with advance knowledge of questions to be posed to her during Democratic campaign events hosted by the news network.
https://www.snopes.com/donna-brazile-leaves-cnn/

Donna Brazile is totally not sorry for leaking CNN debate questions to Hillary Clinton
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...ns-to-hillary-clinton/?utm_term=.77682ef2aad2

 

[Tsing Tao]

Please stop drawing me in by responding to my posts with accusations. I merely directed gwb's own comment where it belonged:

And if someone presents idiot slant pieces as "evidence," what am I to call those idiot slant pieces? Civil discourse includes not trashing it up with falsehoods.

So let's just say goodbye in this thread. So, please, no more false accusations, and you won't hear from me here.

We can agree to disagree, then. Have a great day.

 

[Frederick Foresight]

We also know that CNN is no stranger to retractions when they make a mistake or do something foolish.

CNN drops Brazile for feeding debate questions to Clinton

UPDATE: CNN released the following statement Thursday morning:

CNN did not, and does not, script any questions for town hall meetings, ever.

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/v...fter_denying_question_about_armed_guards.html

 

[Tsing Tao]

But that's merely CNN's official statement. I don't exactly expect a network that has so blatantly deviated from the rules to come outward and say something like "ok, you got me".

 

[Poindexter]

CNN has risked it's credibility many times and been caught before. Regardless, neither one of us is going to change the opinion of the other, so I'm going to focus my discussion on gun control, thanks.

CNN is more dedicated to propaganda and narratives than facts. I don't watch CNN for the same reason I don't eat out of the toilet. Recent example germane to this thread:

Chris Cuomo Spreads Fake AR-15 Story http://dailycaller.com/2018/02/21/chris-cuomo-fake-gun-story/?utm_source=site-share

 

[AAAintheBeltway]

Why in the world would Rubio and Dana agree to go on a CNN-produced show that was clearly going to be nothing more than a staged event to allow carefully coached crisis actors to make emotive pleas at their expense?

Even Trump is not that clueless.

 

[Tsing Tao]

Why in the world would Rubio and Dana agree to go on a CNN-produced show that was clearly going to be nothing more than a staged event to allow carefully coached crisis actors to make emotive pleas at their expense?

Even Trump is not that clueless.

Because if they did not go, CNN would shriek about how they declined and Rubio is thinking about his voters in FL.

 

[gwb-trading]

Why in the world would Rubio and Dana agree to go on a CNN-produced show that was clearly going to be nothing more than a staged event to allow carefully coached crisis actors to make emotive pleas at their expense?

Even Trump is not that clueless.

This is the exact problem with media today. CNN is a classic example. All of its "town halls" and other events are scripted shows. They involve pre-planted questions with audience members from the network, and planted audience members with pre-determined political biases. The entire intent in many of the these scripted events is to do "gotcha" questions to candidates/politicians they don't like and soft-ball questions to candidates/politicians they support.

Naturally many politicians want nothing to do with this type of circus with planted questions from the network and planted "actors" --- the intent is to embarrass the politicians not to have any type of open or civil discourse on the issues.

To be fair - CNN is not the only network that does that. ALL the networks do this! Even the local media now.

All your news from town halls and other public forum events is scripted (just like the media likes it). This means we have lost what the media is suppose to be doing which is bringing real issues from the people to the table for politicians -- and having a real discourse about practical solutions.

 

[AAAintheBeltway]

Because if they did not go, CNN would shriek about how they declined and Rubio is thinking about his voters in FL.

So what? You think the event was a net positive for Rubio? Why does he feel the need to be a tackling dummy for CNN?