• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

"The Non Partisan AARP"

TurtleDude

TurtleDude

warrior of the wetlands
Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 12, 2005
Messages
281,619
Reaction score
100,389
Location
Ohio
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
I just a saw a new Obama Ad where it claims that the NON PARTISAN AARP allegedly claims one of Romney's ads is not accurate. This comes on the tail of the Obama campaign citing the NEW YORK TIMES, the WASHINGTON POST and PRESIDENT CLINTON on the workfare issue.

Does the Obama Campaign really see those four entities as objective?
 
Nonpartisan =! objective.

The AARP is not a partisan organization. That isnt really debatable. (Dont elderly Americans tend to vote more Republican anyway?)

President Clinton certainly is not nonpartisan; he does however seem to have goodwill with a large section of America, which would likely be why his opinion is included.

The New York Times and Washington Post are reasonably well-respected news organizations; the New York Times especially. I know American news is kind of a joke; news-for-profit gets the results one should expect. However, I suspect for most of the population attacking the source when the source is well-accredited is something of a non-starter. Just because a citation suggests a result you dont like doesnt mean its false.
 
theseki said:
Nonpartisan =! objective.

The AARP is not a partisan organization. That isnt really debatable. (Dont elderly Americans tend to vote more Republican anyway?)

President Clinton certainly is not nonpartisan; he does however seem to have goodwill with a large section of America, which would likely be why his opinion is included.

The New York Times and Washington Post are reasonably well-respected news organizations; the New York Times especially. I know American news is kind of a joke; news-for-profit gets the results one should expect. However, I suspect for most of the population attacking the source when the source is well-accredited is something of a non-starter. Just because a citation suggests a result you dont like doesnt mean its false.
Click to expand...

the AARP has been a major proponent of ObamaTaxCare
 
TurtleDude said:
I just a saw a new Obama Ad where it claims that the NON PARTISAN AARP allegedly claims one of Romney's ads is not accurate. This comes on the tail of the Obama campaign citing the NEW YORK TIMES, the WASHINGTON POST and PRESIDENT CLINTON on the workfare issue.

Does the Obama Campaign really see those four entities as objective?
Click to expand...

Buying into his shovel-ready line of bull is probably Obama's definition of being objective. Imo the AARP is just another hog feeding at the government trough.
 
TurtleDude said:
the AARP has been a major proponent of ObamaTaxCare
Click to expand...

Regardless of whether or not they support an individual piece of legislation (one that happens to benefit their constituency; its understandable why they support it), they are not a partisan organization. The AARP is not affiliated with any political party. It is heavily wooed by Republicans and Democrats because old people vote reliably. It is nonpartisan.

Once again: nonpartisan =! objective.
 
The New York Times and the Washington Post are the two most respected news organizations in the country. They rank No. 1 and No. 2 in Pulitzer Prizes.
 
AdamT said:
The New York Times and the Washington Post are the two most respected news organizations in the country. They rank No. 1 and No. 2 in Pulitzer Prizes.
Click to expand...

They also rank 1 and 2 in their unmitigated support of Barack Obama's candidacy. They are mostly respected by the establishment that admitted voting for Dem presidential candidates 90% of the time

we call such things a "circle jerk"
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom