LaxPower Back-Up Stick

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Thu Sep 12, 2019 10:18 pm

runrussellrun wrote: ↑Wed Sep 11, 2019 5:10 pm wow, MD lax, who knew .........So you must have wanted fiction banned....and all the tabloids. MAD magazine too. Silence D good letters are junk.

Who is kidding who, you just admitted that YOU want more of what GOOGLE admits to doing already.... censorship.....and out of the other side of your mouth you claim that no such censorship exists in the first place.

Can you list any websites that are constantly embellishing or outright lying? And NOT from one guy in his basement, labeling websites, news outlets, etc.

(remember, it's the news that is NOT covered that is a problem for YOUR msm. Case in point, AOC helping raise funds for those arrested in Boston (antifa) google it and you get no MSM hits. Hmmm....why is that. It is very true. Just check her twitter feed. TLD said it was a lie. But, it's NOT)

You also never answered why Tulsi Gabbard was suing google. Hmmm, again, why is that?

You are very much like wife 1, passive aggressive cause N effect denier. I'm very much like Lars, HIT FIRST. Your ivory tower rants are legend.

I guarantee you you do NOT subscribe to any youtube (google) channel to get your news.

True, I don't use Youtube to get my news at all.

I prefer journalism.

I never said that Google isn't screening out content they deem undesirable. Nor do I suggest at all that such power isn't enormous.

But they are a private business, so your personal rights of free speech aren't infringed because they screen out porn and hate speech. You're welcome to publish elsewhere. Yell it from the roof tops. Your roof top preferably.

This is a way more complicated issue, which I suggest is worth discussing...but not by hurling insults.

runrussellrun wrote: ↑Thu Sep 12, 2019 10:29 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Thu Sep 12, 2019 10:18 pm

runrussellrun wrote: ↑Wed Sep 11, 2019 5:10 pm wow, MD lax, who knew .........So you must have wanted fiction banned....and all the tabloids. MAD magazine too. Silence D good letters are junk.

Who is kidding who, you just admitted that YOU want more of what GOOGLE admits to doing already.... censorship.....and out of the other side of your mouth you claim that no such censorship exists in the first place.

Can you list any websites that are constantly embellishing or outright lying? And NOT from one guy in his basement, labeling websites, news outlets, etc.

(remember, it's the news that is NOT covered that is a problem for YOUR msm. Case in point, AOC helping raise funds for those arrested in Boston (antifa) google it and you get no MSM hits. Hmmm....why is that. It is very true. Just check her twitter feed. TLD said it was a lie. But, it's NOT)

You also never answered why Tulsi Gabbard was suing google. Hmmm, again, why is that?

You are very much like wife 1, passive aggressive cause N effect denier. I'm very much like Lars, HIT FIRST. Your ivory tower rants are legend.

I guarantee you you do NOT subscribe to any youtube (google) channel to get your news.

True, I don't use Youtube to get my news at all.

I prefer journalism.

I never said that Google isn't screening out content they deem undesirable. Nor do I suggest at all that such power isn't enormous.

But they are a private business, so your personal rights of free speech aren't infringed because they screen out porn and hate speech. You're welcome to publish elsewhere. Yell it from the roof tops. Your roof top preferably.

This is a way more complicated issue, which I suggest is worth discussing...but not by hurling insults.

cause N the effect.....like I said. geez. You'll never get it.

Oh....what's this....youtube channels ? You're such a dinosaur........ (I never said I have never WaTCHED a NY times video , says MDLAXfan )

https://www.youtube.com/user/npr

youtube.com/user/TheNewYorkTimes

https://www.youtube.com/user/epochtimesdigital

https://www.youtube.com/user/WashingtonPost

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Thu Sep 12, 2019 10:35 pm

runrussellrun wrote: ↑Thu Sep 12, 2019 10:29 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Thu Sep 12, 2019 10:18 pm

runrussellrun wrote: ↑Wed Sep 11, 2019 5:10 pm wow, MD lax, who knew .........So you must have wanted fiction banned....and all the tabloids. MAD magazine too. Silence D good letters are junk.



True, I don't use Youtube to get my news at all.

I prefer journalism.

I never said that Google isn't screening out content they deem undesirable. Nor do I suggest at all that such power isn't enormous.

But they are a private business, so your personal rights of free speech aren't infringed because they screen out porn and hate speech. You're welcome to publish elsewhere. Yell it from the roof tops. Your roof top preferably.

This is a way more complicated issue, which I suggest is worth discussing...but not by hurling insults.

cause N the effect.....like I said. geez. You'll never get it.

Oh....what's this....youtube channels ? You're such a dinosaur........ (I never said I have never WaTCHED a NY times video , says MDLAXfan )

https://www.youtube.com/user/npr

youtube.com/user/TheNewYorkTimes

https://www.youtube.com/user/epochtimesdigital

https://www.youtube.com/user/WashingtonPost

Funny how you can't even keep straight your own statements:

"I guarantee you you do NOT subscribe to any youtube (google) channel to get your news."

You claimed I don't subscribe to any youtube channels to get my news.

Yup, I don't.
I don't subscribe to any of the channels, nor do I search youtube in specific to get my news. You admit to NOT using youtube, at all, for news. You prefer "journalism " Your words, not mine. So, logic would dictate that if you don't ever watch youtube for news, you don't subscribe.

But absolutely, lots of news sites, and other web sites, utilize youtube as their hosting platform for serving video content.
Heck, our site uses youtube for that purpose.

I don't know why you are fixated on trying to pick this fight with me. Just pointing out how all over the place you are..........clearly, again, your lack of hesitation to belittle other posters, and the sources quite often (those sources stinki because ONE guy said its biased....SO WHAT ) isn't the person who needs a chill pill ,pot and ma & pa meet insulting first, kettle, you ?


/quote]

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Thu Sep 12, 2019 10:35 pm

runrussellrun wrote: ↑Thu Sep 12, 2019 10:29 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Thu Sep 12, 2019 10:18 pm

runrussellrun wrote: ↑Wed Sep 11, 2019 5:10 pm wow, MD lax, who knew .........So you must have wanted fiction banned....and all the tabloids. MAD magazine too. Silence D good letters are junk.



True, I don't use Youtube to get my news at all.

I prefer journalism.

I never said that Google isn't screening out content they deem undesirable. Nor do I suggest at all that such power isn't enormous.

But they are a private business, so your personal rights of free speech aren't infringed because they screen out porn and hate speech. You're welcome to publish elsewhere. Yell it from the roof tops. Your roof top preferably.

This is a way more complicated issue, which I suggest is worth discussing...but not by hurling insults.

cause N the effect.....like I said. geez. You'll never get it.

Oh....what's this....youtube channels ? You're such a dinosaur........ (I never said I have never WaTCHED a NY times video , says MDLAXfan )

https://www.youtube.com/user/npr

youtube.com/user/TheNewYorkTimes

https://www.youtube.com/user/epochtimesdigital

https://www.youtube.com/user/WashingtonPost

Funny how you can't even keep straight your own statements:

"I guarantee you you do NOT subscribe to any youtube (google) channel to get your news."

You claimed I don't subscribe to any youtube channels to get my news.

Yup, I don't.
I don't subscribe to any of the channels, nor do I search youtube in specific to get my news. You admit to NOT using youtube, at all, for news. You prefer "journalism " Your words, not mine. So, logic would dictate that if you don't ever watch youtube for news, you don't subscribe.

But absolutely, lots of news sites, and other web sites, utilize youtube as their hosting platform for serving video content.
Heck, our site uses youtube for that purpose.

I don't know why you are fixated on trying to pick this fight with me. Just pointing out how all over the place you are..........clearly, again, your lack of hesitation to belittle other posters, and the sources quite often (those sources stinki because ONE guy said its biased....SO WHAT ) isn't the person who needs a chill pill ,pot and ma & pa meet insulting first, kettle, you ?


/quote]


sheesh RRR, you really are like a dog with a bone on this.

I said I don't use Youtube for my news source AFTER you got nasty about it, saying I don't subscribe to Youtube channels...yup, I don't.
Not sure why that matters at all to you or you think "I admit it" is somehow damning of my view.

But no, I didn't say I don't have a clue how Youtube works or that I never watch anything hosted on Youtube. Just that it's not where I go for news.

If I come across as "belittle other posters" I apologize. Not really my intent, but if I've been caustic in a back and forth, I'll own that.

As to various biased sources, yeah I can be a little rough. Much of what gets published on the web is pretty darn transparently biased and is little more than propaganda for one side or another. So, if I don't know a site well, but suspect (based upon a first impression) that it's just a few jerks (or worse) penning whatever screed they want without any real journalistic oversight, I'll google the site and take a look at whether the site has been reviewed by any media bias reviewers. Those folks dig deeper and over many more articles, devoting far more time to the task, than I'm willing to do. They look at who owns the site and the pattern of behaviors that slant to the way various news is characterized. They've been pretty darn reliable and, not coincidentally, often strongly confirming of my suspicions on first blush.

Some sources have more fundamental credibility than others so it can be interesting to take a look at the author's background, what they've previously written or said...again, looking for a pattern in the way they think and/or treat various topics. Salty, for instance, has a favorite author, published in respectable journals etc. Lots of credibility in some respects, but also some pretty darn deep-seated biases that color his work often quite predictably. He's best read understanding that background.

But let's be clear: There's a lot of garbage out there. Buyer beware.

youthathletics wrote: ↑Tue Sep 17, 2019 5:47 pm Corey Lewandowski keepin' it real: https://www.instagram.com/p/B2hw099nQij/
and there is this: https://www.instagram.com/p/B2hpZ5Vn0HM/

seacoaster wrote: ↑Tue Sep 17, 2019 9:27 pm

youthathletics wrote: ↑Tue Sep 17, 2019 5:47 pm Corey Lewandowski keepin' it real: https://www.instagram.com/p/B2hw099nQij/
and there is this: https://www.instagram.com/p/B2hpZ5Vn0HM/

If you are looking to help with the last and final debasement of politics in this country, you'll move to New Hampshire and cast a vote for Lewandowski. He is really the most loathsome POS around. This is a guy with absolutely nothing to add; everything he does subtracts.

thatsmell wrote: ↑Wed Sep 18, 2019 4:02 pm Lots of Jeb!s this year.

Here's a regularly updated guide to keep them all straight:

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/ar ... de/582598/

HooDat wrote: ↑Thu Sep 19, 2019 1:24 pm Screen Shot 2019-09-19 at 12.22.36 PM.png

seacoaster wrote: ↑Thu Sep 19, 2019 1:42 pm

HooDat wrote: ↑Thu Sep 19, 2019 1:24 pm Screen Shot 2019-09-19 at 12.22.36 PM.png

Good source.

HooDat wrote: ↑Fri Sep 20, 2019 11:22 am So if this Ukraine thing ends up taking down Trump and Biden in a two-for-one special.

...and does so relatively quickly ....

does that inevitably lead to a Nov 2020 choice between Warren and Haley? please,please,please,please,please,please.....