• Please be aware we've switched the forums to their own URL. (again) You'll find the new website address to be www.steelernationforum.com Thanks
  • Please clear your private messages. Your inbox is close to being full.

The Enemy of the People Thread

Superman said:
what i want to know is - why does the media lie? i know some good people who are still in the media - good, honest people - and they get offended when the people in their professions are called liars. I can understand that, as I also see that this paintbrush isnt to encompass all media - just the political sphere of the media.
Click to expand...

There’s no question they lie.
The real question is how could anyone pretend to believe that the media is fair and balanced when the vast majority of journalists vote democrat, whether writers or TV reporters.
That’s a dead giveaway of their bias…which leads to lying.
Blacks, Jews and journalists…count on them to always vote democrat.
It gets worse as time passes.

• Journalists Picked Carter over Reagan: In 1982, scholars at California State University at Los Angeles asked reporters from the fifty largest newspapers for whom they voted in 1980. The breakdown: 51 percent cast a ballot for President Jimmy Carter and another 24 percent chose independent candidate (and liberal Republican Congressman) John Anderson. Only 25 percent picked conservative Ronald Reagan, who won 51 percent of the public’s vote that year.

chart0604_1
• Journalists Picked Mondale over Reagan: In 1985, the Los Angeles Times polled news and editorial staffers at newspapers around the country, weighting the sample so that newspapers with large circulations were more heavily represented. Once again, pollsters discovered a heavy Democratic skew. When asked how they voted in the 1984 election, more than twice as many chose liberal Walter Mondale (58 percent) over the conservative incumbent Ronald Reagan (26 percent), even as the country picked Reagan in a 59 to 41 percent landslide.

• The White House Press Corps Voted for Democrats: In early 1995, Ken Walsh of U.S. News & World Report asked his fellow White House reporters to fill out a survey for a book he was writing; 28 returned his questionnaire. He concluded that “the White House press corps is overwhelmingly Democratic, confirming a stereotype often promoted by Republicans.” Interestingly, he also learned how much reporters dislike being on the receiving end of personal inquiries: “Even though the survey was anonymous, many journalists declined to reveal their party affiliations, whom they voted for in recent presidential elections, and other data they regarded as too personal — even though they regularly pressure Presidents and other officials to make such disclosures,” Walsh related in his 1996 book, Feeding the Beast: The White House Versus the

• Huge Majorities for Dukakis and Clinton: In 2001, Stanley Rothman and Amy E. Black updated the Media Elite’s survey of journalists, and learned that reporters continued to select Democrats. “Three-quarters of elite journalists (76.1 percent)...voted for Michael Dukakis in 1988, and even larger percentages (91.3 percent)...cast ballots for Bill Clinton in 1992,” they reported in the Spring 2001 edition of The Public Interest. Voters were far less exuberant about those liberal candidates, as just 46 percent chose Dukakis and only 43 percent picked Clinton, who nevertheless won a three-way race.

• Nine Out of Ten Reporters Voted for Clinton: Rothman and Black’s survey closely matched a Freedom Forum poll of Washington bureau chiefs and congressional correspondents, which found 89 percent had voted for Clinton in the 1992 election, compared with seven percent for President Bush and two percent for Ross Perot. “In no state or region, among no race or class, did support for Clinton predominate more lopsidedly than among this sample of 139

From the Slate

Trick Question: Guess How Many Journalists Voted for Trump This Year?​


This year, the survey found, not a single Slate staffer voted for President Trump, even though more than 74,200,000 other Americans did — a record haul for a Republican nominee. That compares with 56 staffers who said they voted for Joe Biden (98%), one who picked Green Party candidate Howie Hawkins (2%), and one intern who as of November 2 still hadn’t made up her mind between Hawkins and Biden.

Four years ago, the staff poll showed a similar tilt: 59 votes (97%) for Democrat Hillary Clinton, one for Green Party candidate Jill Stein, one write-in vote for independent candidate Evan McMullin, and none for Donald Trump.

According to this year’s post, “The last time any Slate staffer voted Republican in this survey was for Romney in 2012. Will that be the last time ever? That’s kind of up to the Republican Party more than it’s up to Slate.”

Only 3.4% of U.S. journalists are Republicans: Survey​

(Probably the ones at FOX)

 
Last edited:
You gotta love the tone given to Democrats vs Republicans by the media when each side is accused of wrongdoing.

To the Republican: How dare you!!
To the Democrat: Aww what happened?

 
Last edited:
I was watching Gutfeld last night, sometimes the jokes are funny, some fall flat and sometimes they make you think. They showed a clip of Joe Rogan interviewing Bill Murray, talking about Bob Woodward's book Wired, the life of John Belushi. Murray said he got through the first 5 pages when he realized that the book was complete BS, having known Belushi well. It led him to consider that if Woodward was BSing on this subject, what else in his journalist journey might he be exaggerating or outright lying about, Nixon, Watergate?

That led to a panel discussion about how when you read something that involves a subject that you're well verse on, knowing that it's a crap article, but then you go to an article on a subject you know little about and believe every word. You believe it, well, because it was written by a journalist in a newspaper, and they quote experts! The term for this is Gell-Mann Amnesia, a term I had never heard before. In the Rogan interview, Murray questioned this type of thinking.

We have many knowledgeable posters in this forum that spent their entire career in economics, litigation, medicine, insurance and the military to name just a few, and I'm sure all of us have read something that causes us to say, wait, that just isn't so.

It's the reason that trust of the media is taking a nosedive, believed, I assume, only by those that don't have an expertise on any subject, yet claim to know everything because they read it in the NYT. At least now I know the name for this.
 
 
My personal belief is that Trump will reverse some stuff, delay the inevitable collpase, leave, and the collapse will happen quickly.

I think it's too late.
 
ZonaBurgh said:
I was watching Gutfeld last night, sometimes the jokes are funny, some fall flat and sometimes they make you think. They showed a clip of Joe Rogan interviewing Bill Murray, talking about Bob Woodward's book Wired, the life of John Belushi. Murray said he got through the first 5 pages when he realized that the book was complete BS, having known Belushi well. It led him to consider that if Woodward was BSing on this subject, what else in his journalist journey might he be exaggerating or outright lying about, Nixon, Watergate?

That led to a panel discussion about how when you read something that involves a subject that you're well verse on, knowing that it's a crap article, but then you go to an article on a subject you know little about and believe every word. You believe it, well, because it was written by a journalist in a newspaper, and they quote experts! The term for this is Gell-Mann Amnesia, a term I had never heard before. In the Rogan interview, Murray questioned this type of thinking.

We have many knowledgeable posters in this forum that spent their entire career in economics, litigation, medicine, insurance and the military to name just a few, and I'm sure all of us have read something that causes us to say, wait, that just isn't so.

It's the reason that trust of the media is taking a nosedive, believed, I assume, only by those that don't have an expertise on any subject, yet claim to know everything because they read it in the NYT. At least now I know the name for this.
Click to expand...
Murray Gell-Mann was an incredible physicist who happened to talk about this with Michael Chrichton:

 
Booted said:
Click to expand...

< Chris Berman voice >

"Nobody, and I mean, nobody circles the wagons like the Buffalo Bills... I mean Democrat criminals."

</ Chris Berman voice >
 
Sarge said:
They aren't worried about consequences. The Swamp is plenty big and still plenty full. They still have the media running cover for them. Honestly, what do they have to worry about?
Click to expand...
I would love to see Patel and Elon buy one of the major networks up.
 
Hypocycloids said:
Reminds me of a great quote by comedian Rob Schneider.

View attachment 14054
Click to expand...
I couldn't tell you the title of any network sitcom currently on air or any late night comedians these days. I used to love watching SNL, Letterman and was in tune with Cheers, Seinfeld, Wings, The Cosby Show, etc... Once the 2000s hit, it all went to ****.
 
JMM said:
I couldn't tell you the title of any network sitcom currently on air or any late night comedians these days. I used to love watching SNL, Letterman and was in tune with Cheers, Seinfeld, Wings, The Cosby Show, etc... Once the 2000s hit, it all went to ****.
Click to expand...
Couldn’t agree more. Johnny Carson another one.
I’ve not watched another sitcom regularly since All In The Family and good old Archie.

The lyrics in the opening theme song Those Were The Days:

You knew who you were then,
Girls were girls and men were men…
 
Last edited:
One of the Swampers whose security clearance was revoked this week was one Lisa Monaco.
Research her and the jobs she's had and you'll find that she did more damage to the country than anyone else, including James Comey.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top