• 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!

CNN: An Utterly Embarrassing Organization

You do realize that the "for" and "against" articles appeared in the CNN Op-Ed section, no?
Do you understand how opinion pages work?

If all the voices on CNN wrote opinions in lock-step, then you'd have a problem with that too. :roll:

PS: In other words, you are criticizing CNN for being editorially balanced, and you seem not to even realize that.
 
TheGoverness said:
What about it? Those opinion articles are written by different people.
Click to expand...

Conveniently posted at the times where they needed someone to agree with a position and then disagree as soon as Trump does something about it.
 
ajn678 said:
conveniently posted at the times where they needed someone to agree with a position and then disagree as soon as trump does something about it.
Click to expand...
ding ding ding!
 
ajn678 said:
Conveniently posted at the times where they needed someone to agree with a position and then disagree as soon as Trump does something about it.
Click to expand...
Ivanka publicly advocated for paid maternity leave since at least August 2016.
Is Ivanka Trump's Family Leave Policy Better than the One for New York City Teachers? - Prove It: Math and Education Policy - Education Week Teacher

The Hill has reports on Democrats pushing Ivanka on paid family leave in February 2017.
Dems recruit Ivanka Trump on family leave | TheHill

Dems were pushing Trump on it too, by introducing legislation in early February 2017
Kirsten Gillibrand, Rosa DeLauro to Reintroduce Paid Family Leave Bill | Fortune.com

Your first pro-family leave editorial is from April 2017.

The author of the anti-family leave editorial is from the Cato Institute. It's a hard-right organization. Says so right in the first paragraph.

CNN also has articles about how Democrats were pushing Trump to act on paid family leave in March 2017:
Democrats to Trump: Act on paid family leave - Mar. 14, 2017

Thanks for the cherry picking.
 
Visbek said:
Ivanka publicly advocated for paid maternity leave since at least August 2016.
Is Ivanka Trump's Family Leave Policy Better than the One for New York City Teachers? - Prove It: Math and Education Policy - Education Week Teacher

The Hill has reports on Democrats pushing Ivanka on paid family leave in February 2017.
Dems recruit Ivanka Trump on family leave | TheHill

Dems were pushing Trump on it too, by introducing legislation in early February 2017
Kirsten Gillibrand, Rosa DeLauro to Reintroduce Paid Family Leave Bill | Fortune.com

Your first pro-family leave editorial is from April 2017.

The author of the anti-family leave editorial is from the Cato Institute. It's a hard-right organization. Says so right in the first paragraph.

CNN also has articles about how Democrats were pushing Trump to act on paid family leave in March 2017:
Democrats to Trump: Act on paid family leave - Mar. 14, 2017

Thanks for the cherry picking.
Click to expand...

Its not cherry picking. Its literally CNN using an opinion piece from one of the most anti government agencies in the United States to push CNN's anti Trump agenda. Unless you can give me examples of CNN regularly posting opinion pieces written by Cato Institute members. I'll be waiting.
 
ajn678 said:
Everyone should have a shot at paid family leave (opinion) - CNN.com

Trump's budget to include paid family leave - CNNPolitics.com

How paid family leave hurts women (Opinion) - CNN.com

You can't make this **** up. :lamo
Click to expand...

My mother-in-law is like that. She can have three different opinions (for, against, ambivalent) on the same subject, in the same conversation, with the same person. I just shake my head and go in the other room so as not to embarrass her when that happens.
 
RickJames3000 said:
You do realize that the "for" and "against" articles appeared in the CNN Op-Ed section, no?
Do you understand how opinion pages work?

If all the voices on CNN wrote opinions in lock-step, then you'd have a problem with that too. :roll:

PS: In other words, you are criticizing CNN for being editorially balanced, and you seem not to even realize that.
Click to expand...

I guess a media outlet presenting both sides of an argument is something Right Wingers are not used to.
 
Instead of paid leave, let it be under state disability who is closer to the problem. Plus, the states have more incentive to be efficient and less blind to fraud.
 
calamity said:
I guess a media outlet presenting both sides of an argument is something Right Wingers are not used to.
Click to expand...

Well Drudge doesn't make stuff up and he doesn't influence me either. All he does is print the titles!!!! /sarcasm and stuff I've heard from RWNJs.
 
ModerateGOP said:
Well Drudge doesn't make stuff up and he doesn't influence me either. All he does is print the titles!!!! /sarcasm and stuff I've heard from RWNJs.
Click to expand...

He'd be more credible if he less often cherry picked what he posts on his masthead, and occasionally shared a few left wing articles. Also, all his links are for RW authors.
 
SouthernDemocrat said:
Let me help you out on this one. In contrast to Fox News, on actual news networks, they tend to carry a variety of opinions representing a variety of views in their opinion sections.
Click to expand...

They do????? :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock: What is this sorcery??? I have never heard of it before. My preferred RWNJ Yellow rag doesn't allow opinions I don't agree with.
 
calamity said:
I guess a media outlet presenting both sides of an argument is something Right Wingers are not used to.
Click to expand...

CNN and both sides of an issue. Pick one.
 
SouthernDemocrat said:
Let me help you out on this one. In contrast to Fox News, on actual news networks, they tend to carry a variety of opinions representing a variety of views in their opinion sections.
Click to expand...

Laughable falsehood. In fact I doubt you even typed that with a straight face.
 
ajn678 said:
CNN and both sides of an issue. Pick one.
Click to expand...

Are you actually disputing now what you posted in your OP less than two hours ago?
 
calamity said:
Are you actually disputing now what you posted in your OP less than two hours ago?
Click to expand...

They don't post both sides. They post whatever circle jerk **** that is anti trump, and I don't even like the guy.
 
I guess men don't realize how having a vagina is complicated than having a penis.
 
ajn678 said:
Its not cherry picking. Its literally CNN using an opinion piece from one of the most anti government agencies in the United States to push CNN's anti Trump agenda. Unless you can give me examples of CNN regularly posting opinion pieces written by Cato Institute members. I'll be waiting.
Click to expand...
Ask, and ye shall receive.

Illya Shapiro works for Cato, and has written for CNN since at least 2012
After losing on Gorsuch, Democrats have no leverage (Opinion) - CNN.com
Gorsuch is a jurisprudential rock star - CNN.com
Trump's Court pick: Views from all sides (opinion) - CNN.com
Scalia will be impossible to replace - CNN.com
Court's ruling a 'Frankenstein's Monster' - CNN.com


Jeffrey Miron, libertarian, CNN + Cato for years
http://www.cnn.com/2016/08/08/opinions/trump-economic-policy-miron/
http://www.cnn.com/2014/11/19/opinion/miron-marijuana-legalization/
http://www.cnn.com/2011/OPINION/01/15/miron.arizona.free.speech/
http://www.cnn.com/2016/11/28/opinions/trump-trade-policy-misses-point-miron/


Most of CNN's opinion pieces are not conservative or from a Republican POV. Some are. Even includes some people from Heritage. It's routine.

A sampling from the past 2 weeks:
http://www.cnn.com/2017/05/29/opinions/withdraw-paris-accord-opinion-cruz/index.html
http://www.cnn.com/2017/05/26/opinions/trump-trip-a-success-gardiner-opinion/index.html
http://www.cnn.com/2017/05/23/opini...oes-what-obama-should-have-stanley/index.html
http://www.cnn.com/2017/05/16/opinions/bridge-partisan-divide-opinion-kasich/index.html
 
Visbek said:
Ask, and ye shall receive.

Illya Shapiro works for Cato, and has written for CNN since at least 2012
After losing on Gorsuch, Democrats have no leverage (Opinion) - CNN.com
Gorsuch is a jurisprudential rock star - CNN.com
Trump's Court pick: Views from all sides (opinion) - CNN.com
Scalia will be impossible to replace - CNN.com
Court's ruling a 'Frankenstein's Monster' - CNN.com


Jeffrey Miron, libertarian, CNN + Cato for years
http://www.cnn.com/2016/08/08/opinions/trump-economic-policy-miron/
http://www.cnn.com/2014/11/19/opinion/miron-marijuana-legalization/
http://www.cnn.com/2011/OPINION/01/15/miron.arizona.free.speech/
http://www.cnn.com/2016/11/28/opinions/trump-trade-policy-misses-point-miron/


Most of CNN's opinion pieces are not conservative or from a Republican POV. Some are. Even includes some people from Heritage. It's routine.

A sampling from the past 2 weeks:
http://www.cnn.com/2017/05/29/opinions/withdraw-paris-accord-opinion-cruz/index.html
http://www.cnn.com/2017/05/26/opinions/trump-trip-a-success-gardiner-opinion/index.html
http://www.cnn.com/2017/05/23/opini...oes-what-obama-should-have-stanley/index.html
http://www.cnn.com/2017/05/16/opinions/bridge-partisan-divide-opinion-kasich/index.html
Click to expand...

So you posted a total of 8 Cato pieces from a website that has been going on for many years. That's not good enough to be honest.
 
ajn678 said:
Conveniently posted at the times where they needed someone to agree with a position and then disagree as soon as Trump does something about it.
Click to expand...
All paid family leave is not created equal -- in fact, the Trump proposal is heavily biased towards those with money. Having op-eds taking different sides is exactly what a balanced news source provides. It seems you want to publish only cheerleading opinions and filter out anything to the contrary.
 
All in all, CNN doesn't even need to use any of this to lose face. They have been steadily doing that since before the election began with their brand of thought policing, and mental gymnastics.

The moment you become a political watch dog for the Clinton Foundation, you lose all respect in my book.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom