![]() |
|
View Poll Results: Do you live in one of America's inner cities? | |||
Yes, I live in a but I got inner city |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
41 | 18.55% |
Yes, I live in a crime infested inner city |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
35 | 15.84% |
Yes, I live in a burning crime infested inner city |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
33 | 14.93% |
Bush burned the crime infested towers |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
153 | 69.23% |
Multiple Choice Poll. Voters: 221. You may not vote on this poll |
![]() |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
![]() Quote:
| |||
|
|
![]() Quote:
| |||
|
|
![]() Quote:
| |||
|
|
![]() Quote:
That said, when I used to occasionally watch Fox it would broadcast so many lies or misleading reports (that from my own knowlege or experience i knew were untrue). I think it is really clever what they did. They create narratives people want to hear and use them to leverage the agenda of those behind Fox. However, their narratives were at odds with most other news outlets because of this. Creating a label for what they were doing, then using it as a way to attack other sources wasn't great. Whats the chances one media outlet is right if dozens of independent outlets tell a differing story? It would be one hell of a coincidence for everyone else to be wrong. And here is where the real genius lies: they remove the coincidence, and cement their own position, with the simple explainstion 'the other providers are all controlled by a singular malevolent invisible entity'. And so the idea of deepstate media was born. So yea, basically I believe 'deep state' was a bogeyman created by Fox to explain why the majority of outlets spin stories very differently to the Fox method. Smart. | |||
|
|
![]() Quote:
| |||
|
|
![]() Quote:
I feel sad for you. You have so much hate. | |||
|
|
![]() Quote:
I'm not sexist at all, I believe there is no law limiting a women from what a man can achieve. Everything is a choice. You can choose to have a child or you can't. If you are career driven as a women, you are career driven. If you choose to have a child, a mother offers valuable growth to a child throughout his youth. Both are important but it even goes back to the philosophy of nature vs nurture. This has been historically written about since the end of time which almost every religion, philosophy, etc. It's been learned from mammals and several other. Yes, it is possible to raise with a father but the outcome creates variance and goes against what has worked for a very long time. I know Feniin thinks anyone who is doing something new or edgy is right but that isn't the case. Modern world ideas aren't always good. If anything I think women are empowered by the only gender that have the right to birth a child and we should cherish that. | |||
|
![]() |
|
|