4 ms·

<edited> So as it's going to be a flame war apparently I've deleted the comment. I'd just like to register my opinion that I don't see Washington Post is an ob

by mythrwy 10y ago

<edited> So as it's going to be a flame war apparently I've deleted the comment. I'd just like to register my opinion that I don't see Washington Post is an objective, nor even a trustworthy source at this point. When they print something it's often worth looking deeper into I believe.

st3v3r 10y ago
That's entirely incorrect. The Republicans own actions, and absolutely nothing else, portrays them in a bad light.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
alistproducer2 10y ago
>Although Washington Post isn't quite Brietbart yet they appear to be headed rapidly in that direction from my perspective So you've never actually been to Breitbart then? I checked it regularly before the 2016 elections and, in those days, it certainly earned its nickname "stormfront lite." They've toned it down since the additional scrutiny and subsequent mainstreaming of the Trump era, but WaPo has never been and will never even come close to Breitbart. Also Breitbart is an overt propaganda outlet. WaPo may seem biased, but it certainly does not engage propaganda on the same level as Breitbart.
- masonic 10y ago
  WaPo has never been and will never even come close to Breitbart. Well, they certainly weren't close to the Obama administration or Clinton campaign like WaPo was, as clearly revealed in numerous WikiLeaks-exposed email exchanges. Meanwhile, if you see any factual errors on Breitbart, by all means post them.
  - brownbat 10y ago
    > Meanwhile, if you see any factual errors on Breitbart, by all means post them. I liked this one: http://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/breitbart-issues-best-correction-since-forever http://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/breitbart-issues-best-co...
  - anigbrowl 10y ago
    You don;'t need facts when your product is bigotry rather than information.
aanm1988 10y ago
> Last time I posted something like this it turned into a bit of a flame war Gee I wonder why.
- mythrwy 10y ago
  Ya, so do I. Seriously. We can't have different political opinions without it turning into this?
- dang 10y ago
  You've been posting quite a few unsubstantive and borderline uncivil comments to HN. Would you please stop?
  - aanm1988 10y ago
    So posting comments with misleading information and media bashing is substantive and civil? I'll stick to that then.
    - deleted 10y ago
      [deleted]
warlox 10y ago
> I'd just like to register my opinion that I don't see Washington Post is an objective, nor even a trustworthy source at this point. That's because you probably believe that the Illuminati or clockwork elves are real.
- arca_vorago 10y ago
  Or maybe its because operation mockingbird never went away and wapo is quantifiably part of that core narrative group. Yours is the kind of negative, noncontributory comment I would'nt be surprised to see dang flag.
  - warlox 10y ago
    Yours is the kind of negative, noncontributory comment I wouldn't be surprised to see dang flag. Your comment consists entirely of conspiracy theories and personal attacks.

by mythrwy 10y ago

st3v3r 10y ago

That's entirely incorrect. The Republicans own actions, and absolutely nothing else, portrays them in a bad light.

deleted 10y ago
[deleted]

alistproducer2 10y ago

>Although Washington Post isn't quite Brietbart yet they appear to be headed rapidly in that direction from my perspective So you've never actually been to Breitbart then? I checked it regularly before the 2016 elections and, in those days, it certainly earned its nickname "stormfront lite." They've toned it down since the additional scrutiny and subsequent mainstreaming of the Trump era, but WaPo has never been and will never even come close to Breitbart. Also Breitbart is an overt propaganda outlet. WaPo may seem biased, but it certainly does not engage propaganda on the same level as Breitbart.

masonic 10y ago
WaPo has never been and will never even come close to Breitbart. Well, they certainly weren't close to the Obama administration or Clinton campaign like WaPo was, as clearly revealed in numerous WikiLeaks-exposed email exchanges. Meanwhile, if you see any factual errors on Breitbart, by all means post them.
- brownbat 10y ago
  > Meanwhile, if you see any factual errors on Breitbart, by all means post them. I liked this one: http://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/breitbart-issues-best-correction-since-forever http://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/breitbart-issues-best-co...
- anigbrowl 10y ago
  You don;'t need facts when your product is bigotry rather than information.

aanm1988 10y ago

> Last time I posted something like this it turned into a bit of a flame war Gee I wonder why.

mythrwy 10y ago
Ya, so do I. Seriously. We can't have different political opinions without it turning into this?
dang 10y ago
You've been posting quite a few unsubstantive and borderline uncivil comments to HN. Would you please stop?
- aanm1988 10y ago
  So posting comments with misleading information and media bashing is substantive and civil? I'll stick to that then.
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]

warlox 10y ago

> I'd just like to register my opinion that I don't see Washington Post is an objective, nor even a trustworthy source at this point. That's because you probably believe that the Illuminati or clockwork elves are real.

arca_vorago 10y ago
Or maybe its because operation mockingbird never went away and wapo is quantifiably part of that core narrative group. Yours is the kind of negative, noncontributory comment I would'nt be surprised to see dang flag.
- warlox 10y ago
  Yours is the kind of negative, noncontributory comment I wouldn't be surprised to see dang flag. Your comment consists entirely of conspiracy theories and personal attacks.