Quote:
Originally posted by ^Ice_Bat^
Agreed. I'd even go further and say he's a lunatic whose neural wiring problems sent him on a mind trip to outer space. What's even more saddening is that there are those people (namely Democrats) who believe all his wacky nonsense, and get all their "facts" from him rather than venture to a reliable news medium and research the truth. It's why liberal news media and talk shows have failed... liberals do not listen to the radio or try and stay informed for the most part. This is mainly why they are liberals. Don't get me wrong, I respect liberals, I disrespect idiots. Often, however, the two go hand in hand unfortunately.
|
I'm definitely interested in hearing some examples of what you consider "reliable" new sources. I'm also interested in hearing examples of failed liberal media outlets. Although I do agree that there is a dearth of progressive perspectives in mainstream American media, I disagree on the causes of this shortage. However, I am surprised by your recognition of the conservative nature of US media. A common theme in American "conservatism" (meaning more Republican than liberatarian) is the idea of the omnipresent liberal media that distorts all reporting through it's leftist lens. This concept is, of course, ludicrous given the recent consolidation of media ownership under fewer and fewer large corporations (some of the most conservative institutions on earth).
Regardless of whether or not that you believe in the liberal media myth, do you really believe that the majority of liberals have chosen that belief system because they are uninformed and don't bother to change that condition? You say that you respect liberals, but your description of them doesn't exactly drip with respect. Saying that all liberals get all of their ideas from Michael Moore is like saying that Rush Limbaugh represents the totality of conservative thought. Both are a blustery and have their share of fans (and detractors), but neither is a true representation of their respective ideologies.