3 ms·
Or just judge them by their actions, not anything that is said. Examine their voting record, lobby donations, and primary information and action. Decide from t
by icelancer 9y ago
Or just judge them by their actions, not anything that is said.
Examine their voting record, lobby donations, and primary information and action. Decide from there.
- ithkuil 9y agoAt some point you have to trust some sort of authority that provides you with those records, along with the required context.
- chiefalchemist 9y agoWhy is that? Why can't you keep an open mind, traverse multiple sources and draw your own conclusions? Think of it as a diversified portfolio. I'm not asking for more time, just that it we spread out. Without that, we get the barely binary system that we have. The MSM can be lazy and non-journalistic because no one bothers to notice. No one cares.
- ithkuil 9y agounfortunately an average of two opposing lies is not always the truth
- Natsu 9y agoTrue, but some evidence is harder to fake than others, especially when there are multiple independent items that corroborate some fact or another. Granted, there are definitely things that aren't amenable to this, but it's not exactly hopeless, either.
- ithkuil 9y agoNo it's not hopeless, but when done right it becomes indistinguishable from true investigative and research work; wouldn't be nice if you could share the results of that extensive effort put into uncovering the truth so that others could benefit? Oh, wait...
- icelancer 9y agoAre you insinuating that voting records are faked? Because raw data of voting is what I'm referring to.