Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Elphaba
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.
|
As I just admitted above, I'm not always right, and if compelling evidence is brought to bear showing how I'm wrong, I'll gladly correct myself. So that's now out of the way.
As to the claim of "attacking the source and not the content", I
was discussing the content. The content of the article is supposedly about how biased US media is, and the US media's inability to deal properly with tragedy. I was showing that the very comments that the blogger was using to supposedly show the levelheadedness and clear thinking of British media were, just maybe, as politically motivated as the comments attributed to the right-leaning portions as the US media. And how I "twisted" a comment that WAS DIRECTLY QUOTED IN THE ORIGINAL ARTICLE is beyond me.
And you are fooling yourself if you expect anyone to believe that the purpose of you posting that was to show some sort of unbiased account of the difference between British and US media. Us "conservatives" aren't as stupid as you'd like to believe.