One Political PlazaSM - Home of politics
A reply to the idea of dems turning America to socialist state
Page: <<prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 next>>
Nov 21, 2020 18:29:23   #
Bad Bob Loc: Virginia
 
Mikeyavelli wrote:
At first, bonds and blue chips, then tech, the dotcom era treated me well, now everything, ETFs, tech, health, tax free bonds, Dogs of the Dow, mutual funds, all balanced.


Bull shit

| Reply
Nov 21, 2020 18:38:59   #
Mikeyavelli
 
Bad Bob wrote:
Bull shit


That's right, no one should be successful. Especially prudent investors who saved their money and watched it grow, especially under Trump, even with your darling Virus attacking America's economy so that Biddie Biden can rebuild it back better. Losers hate winners, and Biden is the loser's candidate.

| Reply
Nov 21, 2020 19:33:46   #
Bad Bob Loc: Virginia
 
Mikeyavelli wrote:
That's right, no one should be successful. Especially prudent investors who saved their money and watched it grow, especially under Trump, even with your darling Virus attacking America's economy so that Biddie Biden can rebuild it back better. Losers hate winners, and Biden is the loser's candidate.


BS is right, give the tech stock IDs.

| Reply
Nov 21, 2020 21:29:19   #
SSDD
 
American Vet wrote:
You haven't proven there are lies.


Considering the sources you listed, the fact that legitimate media tells a very different story and ONLY the fake news sources make the claims, yeah, I think I am good.If I want to read fiction, I will read entertaining fiction, not fiction made up to look like news.

| Reply
Nov 21, 2020 21:31:04   #
American Vet
 
SSDD wrote:
Considering the sources you listed, the fact that legitimate media tells a very different story and ONLY the fake news sources make the claims, yeah, I think I am good.If I want to read fiction, I will read entertaining fiction, not fiction made up to look like news.


Unable to refute the message so attack the messenger. Common leftist tactic.

| Reply
Nov 21, 2020 21:36:59   #
Bad Bob Loc: Virginia
 
American Vet wrote:
Unable to refute the message so attack the messenger. Common leftist tactic.


Your "messages" are still good for a laugh on the crazy shit.

| Reply
Nov 21, 2020 21:59:08   #
SSDD
 
American Vet wrote:
Unable to refute the message so attack the messenger. Common leftist tactic.


Not attacking, telling it like it is.

Wikipedia wrote:
Content
Anti-Muslim bias
The Gatestone Institute has been frequently described as anti-Muslim,[a][12] regularly publishes false reports to stoke anti-Muslim fears,[20][2] and has published false stories pertaining to Muslims and Islam.[17][23][12] Gatestone frequently warns of a looming "jihadist takeover" and "Islamization" of Europe, leading to a "Great White Death".[13] Gatestone authors have a particular interest in Germany and Sweden, and frequently criticize leaders such as Macron and Merkel.[13]

Gatestone has published the writings of Geert Wilders. It hosted a 2012 talk by Wilders and paid for a trip he made to the United States in 2016. Gatestone has been criticized for affiliating itself with Wilders, who says that he "hates Islam."[10][24][25][26]

Alina Polyakova, a Brookings Institution fellow and expert on far-right populism, said that Gatestone's content "was clearly anti-immigrant" and "anti-Muslim".[13]

Policy analyst J. Dana Stuster of the National Security Network, writing in The Hill, criticized Gatestone as "paranoid" for claiming that immigration to Europe was "civilization jihad" and a "Muslim invasion".[27]

The Council on American-Islamic Relations has accused Gatestone's founder, Nina Rosenwald, of anti-Muslim bias. Muslim writers for the Gatestone Institute have defended the organization and Rosenwald against the claims by CAIR.[28] Zuhdi Jasser, founder and president of the American Islamic Forum for Democracy, said, "It goes without saying, but to those who may not know Nina, and having known her now for many years, it is clear to me that she has the highest respect for Muslims who love their faith, love God, and take seriously our Islamic responsibility to defeat the global jihad and its Islamist inspiration."[28] Alan Dershowitz, a civil libertarian lawyer and academic who contributes to Gatestone, also defended the organization against charges of anti-Muslim bias.[29]

Inaccurate reports
Multiple viral anti-immigrant and anti-Muslim falsehoods originate from Gatestone.[17][13][30][31]

In 2011[32] and 2012,[15] Gatestone published articles claiming that Europe had Muslim "no-go zones", falsely describing them variously as "off-limits to non-Muslims"[15] and "microstates governed by Islamic Sharia law".[32][5] The claim that there are areas in European cities that are lawless and off limits to local police or governed by Sharia is false.[15][32][5][17][20] Gatestone's claims were picked up by many outlets, including FrontPageMag,[32] and The Washington Times.[5] The idea of no-go zones originated from Daniel Pipes,[32] who later retracted his claims.[15]

On November 18, 2016, Gatestone published an article that said the British Press had been ordered to avoid reporting the Muslim identity of terrorists by the European Union. Snopes rated the claim "false". Snopes pointed out that the report only made a recommendation and it was issued by the Council of Europe, not the European Union.[16] Gatestone subsequently corrected the article and apologized for the error,[33] before removing it entirely from its website.

In 2017, Gatestone falsely claimed that 500 churches closed and 423 new mosques opened in London since 2001, and argued that London was being islamized and turning into "Londonistan".[34][13] According to Snopes, Gatestone used "shoddy research and cherry-picked data."[34] Specifically, Gatestone only counted churches that closed but not churches that opened; data for the period 2005-2012 alone show that 700 new churches opened in London.[34]

In 2017, Gatestone ran a story about high Muslim fertility rates, headlined "Muslims Tell Europe: 'One Day This Will All Be Ours.'" However, no Muslim said the quote in question. The quote came from a French Catholic bishop who claimed that this was something that Muslims had told him.[35] The misleadingly headlined article was widely distributed on Facebook, and its claims were repeated by other conservative websites.[35]

The Gatestone Institute published false articles during the 2017 German federal election.[36] A Gatestone article, shared thousands of times on social media, including by senior German far-right politicians, claimed that vacant homes were being seized in Germany to provide housing solutions for "hundreds of thousands of migrants from Africa, Asia, and the Middle East."[14] The German fact-checker Correctiv.org found that this was false; a single house was placed in temporary trusteeship, and had nothing to do with refugees whatsoever.[14] Gatestone also cross-posted a Daily Mail article, which, according to Buzzfeed News, "grossly mischaracterized crime data" concerning crime by refugees in Germany.[37]
Content br Anti-Muslim bias br The Gatestone Insti... (show quote)


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gatestone_Institute#Content

MBFC wrote:
Overall, we rate the Heritage Foundation Right Biased based on conservative policy positions as well as funding from right-leaning organizations. We also rate them Mixed for factual reporting due to promoting misleading claims regarding global warming and the health dangers associated with tobacco.


https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/heritage-foundation/


MBFC wrote:
Analysis / Bias

The National Review Online describes itself as “America’s most widely read and influential magazine and web site for conservative news, commentary, and opinion.”

In review, the National Review Online frequently uses loaded emotional wording in headlines that favor the right such as Weapons of Mass Manipulation. This article was written by conservative pundit Michelle Malkin who has made false claims according to fact-checkers. When reporting on President Trump the National Review offers a reasonable balance of pro-Trump and anti-Trump articles with slightly more favoring the President and his policies. National Review typically sources their information to known right-leaning sources, but sometimes links to factually mixed sources such as PJ Media and the Daily Mail. Editorially, they endorse conservative policy and politicians, such as their endorsement of Ted Cruz during the 2016 Presidential Election. Finally, story selection always favors the right, while painting liberal policy negatively.



A factual search reveals that in this article the National Review sourced the Daily Mail who falsely reported that NOAA manipulated climate data. This was later debunked by the person they were quoting (Dr. Bates). Further, the National Review did not include the actual statements that Dr. Bates made, which refute the Daily Mail and National Review’s claims of unverified and corrected data. Bates said there was “no data tampering, no data changing, nothing malicious.” “It’s really a story of not disclosing what you did,” Bates said in the interview. “It’s not trumped up data in any way shape or form,” FactCheck.org concluded that the National Review’s article was misleading.
Analysis / Bias br br The National Review Online ... (show quote)



https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/national-review/

I am not familiar with atr to be honest, but knowing you, heavily ultra conservative.

| Reply
Nov 21, 2020 22:28:30   #
Mikeyavelli
 
Bad Bob wrote:
BS is right, give the tech stock IDs.


I'm sending you my tax returns.

| Reply
Nov 21, 2020 22:42:47   #
Bad Bob Loc: Virginia
 
Mikeyavelli wrote:
I'm sending you my tax returns.



| Reply
Nov 21, 2020 23:06:49   #
Mikeyavelli
 
Bad Bob wrote:


Ok, I own Burisma and Dominion.
Burisma pays me 83 grand a month and just recently I got a two million dollar check from Dominion and Scytl for a very small favor.

| Reply
Nov 21, 2020 23:12:48   #
Bad Bob Loc: Virginia
 
Mikeyavelli wrote:
Ok, I own Burisma and Dominion.
Burisma pays me 83 grand a month and just recently I got a two million dollar check from Dominion and Scytl for a very small favor.


Is that all? I got a billion from George Soros as a troll.

| Reply
Nov 22, 2020 06:39:06   #
American Vet
 
SSDD wrote:
https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/national-review/

I am not familiar with atr to be honest, but knowing you, heavily ultra conservative.


But you still failed to refute the content.......

If the source is so bad, you should easily be able to find something in your 'acceptable' sources.

| Reply
Nov 22, 2020 10:07:47   #
Mikeyavelli
 
Bad Bob wrote:
Is that all? I got a billion from George Soros as a troll.

Has Soros had any buyer's remorse?

| Reply
Nov 22, 2020 10:55:39   #
Bad Bob Loc: Virginia
 
Mikeyavelli wrote:
Has Soros had any buyer's remorse?


Soros only hires the best people.

| Reply
Nov 22, 2020 12:18:19   #
Mikeyavelli
 
Bad Bob wrote:
Soros only hires the best people.


Oh my, then I wonder what he pays AOC?
She's the smartest hire he's got!

| Reply
Page: <<prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 next>>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
OnePoliticalPlaza.com - Forum
Copyright 2012-2020 IDF International Technologies, Inc.