Quote:
|
Originally Posted by alansmithee
The bolded section is mine. In essence, what you are saying here is that if someone designated as "right" says something, it's "merely venting or promoting a particular political agenda". But when a "veteran" journalist said the bolded section, it's "a thoughtful, nuanced discussion that was focused on finding solutions".
And after doing a search and perusal of some of Mr. Younge's previous articles, it's obvious he would be the last one to vent or promote a particular political agenda [/sarcasm].
But hey, why let a perfectly good tragedy go to waste when political capital can be mined from it?
|
Alan, this is the view of a Londoner I know that shared this article. Respectfully, we of the US with only two parties (that don't have a dime's worth of difference) really don't understand what is right or left in British politics. We are somewhat slightly right (centrist by British standards), and you have no idea about "left" if you haven't studied politics outside of the US.
The article is presented as a different view of the media between the US and Britain. But, once again... dialogue about the content is not possible. You attack the source, without offering a reasonable discussion.
Shall we just dispense with further comment? You will always be right, anyone that doesn't agree with you is wrong, in any possible way you wish to choose. You have chosen sarcasm, and cherry picked a single comment in the entire article and twisted it to suit your politics.
I continue to hope that reasoned discussion can occur in this forum.