• 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!

Beware of "Judicial Watch" [W:208]

Re: Beware of "Judicial Watch"

Thanks for the link.

I didn't mean to imply that the ACLU is a hit job organization like JW. Someone in this thread said they were comparable, but it wasn't me. I know one person who was defended by the ACLU - a friend of mine. He wanted to get a license plate for his Harley that the state found offensive and refused to issue. They won, and he got the plate.

Good for your friend. And you are correct, there is no comparison of the defamation lawsuits that JW initiates, versus protection of individual rights, per the ACLU.
 
Re: Beware of "Judicial Watch"

Good for your friend. And you are correct, there is no comparison of the defamation lawsuits that JW initiates, versus protection of individual rights, per the ACLU.

If you are going to double down on retarded statements, I'm not sure what to say.

FOIA requests are not defamation suits and its insulting to insinuate that requests for government information is defamation.
 
Re: Beware of "Judicial Watch"

If you are going to double down on retarded statements, I'm not sure what to say.

FOIA requests are not defamation suits and its insulting to insinuate that requests for government information is defamation.

I'd appreciate if you wouldn't say anything, because every time I PROVE you wrong, you resort to deflection. Hijack somebody else's thread. You've already proven your incompetence here.
 
Re: Beware of "Judicial Watch"

I'd appreciate if you wouldn't say anything, because every time I PROVE you wrong, you resort to deflection. Hijack somebody else's thread. You've already proven your incompetence here.

Hit the triangle. Don't tell me where to post. I am discussing your OP. You just don't like the way I am doing so, or the content which is different from your highly distorted opinion.
 
Re: Beware of "Judicial Watch"

Hit the triangle. Don't tell me where to post. I am discussing your OP. You just don't like the way I am doing so, or the content which is different from your highly distorted opinion.

You proved your bias and incompetence in post #189, when you asked me to prove that "most" of Judicial Watch's lawsuits were dismissed. I cited a New York Times article that said a "majority" were dismissed. And like a little child, you balked about the wording.
 
Re: Beware of "Judicial Watch"

You proved your bias and incompetence in post #189, when you asked me to prove that "most" of Judicial Watch's lawsuits were dismissed. I cited a New York Times article that said a "majority" were dismissed. And like a little child, you balked about the wording.

Pardon me, but I don't trust the NYT. If they researched it properly, they know the actual numbers. If you want to prove something, you use numbers, not hyperbole language like "vast majority".
 
Re: Beware of "Judicial Watch"

Pardon me, but I don't trust the NYT. If they researched it properly, they know the actual numbers. If you want to prove something, you use numbers, not hyperbole language like "vast majority".

Well perhaps you should start your own thread about the New York Times? You can convince everybody that they don't know how to use words correctly. Better yet, you could start your own newspaper publication, and be the number one competitor of the Times.:doh
 
Re: Beware of "Judicial Watch"

Moderator's Warning:
Stop the flaming and the baiting and stick to debating the topic folks
 
Re: Beware of "Judicial Watch"

Well perhaps you should start your own thread about the New York Times? You can convince everybody that they don't know how to use words correctly. Better yet, you could start your own newspaper publication, and be the number one competitor of the Times.:doh

This is the media bias forum and you are using the NYT as a source. Am I not allowed to rebut that argument?
 
Re: Beware of "Judicial Watch"

This is the media bias forum and you are using the NYT as a source. Am I not allowed to rebut that argument?

You can use whatever floats your boat. People all over the US subscribe to the NY Times. They have arguably, one of the best reputations for journalism in the US. I'll take their word over yours, that's for sure. They have savvy, creditable journalists. The problem is - you just don't like their assessment of Judicial Watch. A biased organization that is doing nothing but trying to smear Democratic electors and candidates.
 
Re: Beware of "Judicial Watch"

You can use whatever floats your boat. People all over the US subscribe to the NY Times. They have arguably, one of the best reputations for journalism in the US. I'll take their word over yours, that's for sure. They have savvy, creditable journalists. The problem is - you just don't like their assessment of Judicial Watch. A biased organization that is doing nothing but trying to smear Democratic electors and candidates.

Yes, because the truth does that so capably. I don't like the NYT because they let bias bury the truth way too often. They editorialize on the front page.
 
Re: Beware of "Judicial Watch"

Yes, because the truth does that so capably. I don't like the NYT because they let bias bury the truth way too often. They editorialize on the front page.

Funny - a FOX News junkie- calling the NY Times bias. That may be one of the best jokes of the year. FAIR gave FOX news the lowest rating for bias.
The Most Biased Name in News | FAIR

If you don't know who FAIR is, they led the charge against illegal immigration for the last 31 years.
 
Re: Beware of "Judicial Watch"

Funny - a FOX News junkie- calling the NY Times bias. That may be one of the best jokes of the year. FAIR gave FOX news the lowest rating for bias.
The Most Biased Name in News | FAIR

If you don't know who FAIR is, they led the charge against illegal immigration for the last 31 years.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fairness_and_Accuracy_in_Reporting

Fairness and Accuracy In Reporting (FAIR) is a media criticism organization based in New York City.[1] The organization was founded in 1986 by Jeff Cohen and Martin A. Lee.[2] FAIR describes itself as "the national media watch group".[2] The organization has been described as both progressive and leaning left.[3][4][5][6][7]

FAIR monitors the U.S. news media for "inaccuracy, bias, and censorship" and advocates for greater diversity of perspectives in news reporting. It is opposed to corporate ownership of media entities and calls for the break-up of media conglomerates.[8] FAIR publishes Extra!, a monthly newsletter of media criticism, and also produces a weekly, half-hour radio program called CounterSpin, heard on more than 150 stations

Get a real source.
 
Re: Beware of "Judicial Watch"

Nope, but Media Matters Jr isn't going to cut it.

Media Matters presents a look at Right wing bias in the media. You have shown, through all your posts, that you will not admit that there is any Right Wing bias, which is just absurd. The heavily funded Judicial Watch is a huge part of the Right Wing bias, and part of the Right Wing Think Tank agenda, which is leading this country to an Oligarchal form of government.
 
Re: Beware of "Judicial Watch"

Media Matters presents a look at Right wing bias in the media. You have shown, through all your posts, that you will not admit that there is any Right Wing bias, which is just absurd. The heavily funded Judicial Watch is a huge part of the Right Wing bias, and part of the Right Wing Think Tank agenda, which is leading this country to an Oligarchal form of government.

You REALLY haven't been paying attention. I have acknowledged there is right wing bias and it counterbalances the leftwing bias. Its that last sentence of yours that's absurd.
 
Back
Top Bottom