Liberal Forum

So you have no duty to source your "facts" - the people who fed you your opinion already did that for you. And we should trust your judgment that they are "generally reliable." And you don't bother with original analysis. The thinking is already done for you, by sources you trust - and that means...

As I explicitly said. One party cannot keep a good face if they ignore facts from a neutral or even friendly media source - they will discredit their own argument if they call **** on such sources, and lose all credibility. But no one has to blindly trust ANY source, simply because you do. If it is...

Facts are not facts until BOTH parties agree. One party cannot keep a good face if they ignore facts from a neutral or even friendly media source - they will discredit their own argument if they call **** on such sources, and lose all credibility. But no one has to blindly trust ANY source, simply...

Sorry, I'm not being paid to take the time to go through all that, especially when no matter what I cite, most on the other side will brush it off anyway. And who defines "neutral?" For decades, the liberal-left has insulted and rejected excellent sources like Robert Conquest. Do I have to wait 3 d...

As she cites an utter joke of a leftist wackjob source. Gosh, another apparent felony by a close Clinton associate, from a highly respected author. So how will you smear him? Because that's all you got. RussiaGate: Hillary Clinton and John Podesta's Troubling Ties to Russia BY DEBRA HEINE MAR...

1. You could just drop it - not use that evidence, or 2. Plow ahead and damn the torpedoes, or 3. Start a NEW thread about the MSM coverup. The problem with you is that you will commonly use an agenda source when legitimate sources SHOULD be available - for example, WSJ OpEds. Assuming the WSJ does...

If it's citing factual information that supposedly "objective" sources in the corrupt liberal MSM will refuse to cover, only a moron would not use partisan sources. I could go on for literally days about massive amounts of information the MSM either hid or just refused to cover. So what should I d...

Yeah, I get quite angry when decent people are dishonestly smeared. So who's crazy, the person who gets angered by smears? Or the person who commits them and has for many years?...

The last one, Dim....

Figures you'd cite leftist bulls***. It claims that the wackjob left Nation Institute is moderately liberal. Same for moonbat left Rolling Stone. I mean, every media outlet I copied from its list is hopelessly liberal biased to the point of ethical and even financial corruption in many ca...