A community of 30,000 US Transcriptionist serving Medical Transcription Industry

citing sources - left vs right

Posted: Mar 21, 2012

As I see it, one problem on this board is citing acurate sources. It's really not our fault as informed voters. It's the fault of the media - radio, TV, internet, newspapers, etc.

For example, if a poster here wants to discuss "Fast and Furious," the only sources are going to be right-leaning sources (RLS), since the left-leaning sources (LLS) are not covering the story. The same is true, for example, regarding the transvag ultrasound story only being reported by left-leaning sources.

For me, personally, if someone posts something that interests me and sources an LLS, I will do some research and look for other sources for information. The same is true if I read something on a RLS - I will do research on that also.

The media has become so tainted, it is frustrating (for me, at least). Unfortunately, there is no such thing as un-biased reporting any longer. It seems that the formerly-trusted news sources have an agenda and will go to great lengths to smear and distort the truth so much so that they should be called fiction writers and not reporters. Journolist.

I guess my point is that before we blast someone for posting something from an RLS or LLS, we have to keep in mind that the only source for some of those stories are the RLS and the LLS - and not both. In other words, just because it's not being covered by your favorite news source doesn't mean it's not true. Why not keep an open mind about it and check it out? Maybe, just maybe, since it was covered on LLS and not RLS, it's a credible story - and vice versa. Even still, I think it may be wishful thinking on my part, since I can hear it now .... "Fox Lies!!" and "Media Matters is a Soros-funded media machine!!"

OK, that's all I got.

;

Bringing my message here from below - anony2

[ In Reply To ..]
This post from below goes with this topic.

Why should anyone put up any links because those links are already slotted to be told they are not valid or credible.

We are not asking posters to search for validation of our claims. We are making a statement of our opinion or fact. Sometimes we put a link, sometimes not.

Say for instance someone says one of Obama's czars is a communist. If I'm sitting here saying, no that's not possible I don't believe it, it is my job to pull up Google or Bing or whatever search engine and start research for myself. It's my job to reference, cross reference and then cross reference the cross reference. Then with that information I can analyze it for myself and decide whether or not I want to believe it.

Sometimes there is no link to information people post, sometimes there is. So we put a link up, you come back with. It's not credible. Then we come back with another link and you once again say it's not credible and this goes on for 10 or so times until it ends in an argument.

As an investigator you need to look at all leads. If someone tells you Hillary had a drug problem (which she doesn't of course, that is just an example). The investigator then says to the person, how do you know this and they say some thing that makes the investigator wonder whether or not its true. The investigator doesn't keep telling that person prove it, prove it again, prove it again, etc. No, the investigator then does extensive research and interviews of several different people and jobs, etc to find the truth. That is his responsibility. This is no different.

So it is a readers responsibility to find out for themselves whether or they believe information. If you read several different sites and you find out its not true then you just sit back and say oh that anony2, she's just blowing smoke and then you move on to better things. Or if you find it to be true, then you have to say...you know I thought that wasn't true but after all the research I've done I might possibly be wrong.

Nothing wrong with being wrong. I've had to admit hundreds of times I was wrong - and out loud too :-)

In my opinion you are wrong - sm

[ In Reply To ..]
I don't need to cross reference that. Also, since you mention czars and communists, I don't think you have ever admitted your are wrong. Just my humble opinion that is verifiable by my say so.

Yes, we are all entitled to our opinions - anony2

[ In Reply To ..]
And I feel you are wrong. If someone wants to know something they go look it up. Its as simple as that. The 2 references I made regarding the Czars and Hillary were examples. That's why I said "say for instance" and "that is just an example". And no I do not think I am wrong about my post. I feel if a person wants to know some information it is their responsibility to research that. In fact I do not think, I know I'm right about that.

And if you are talking about any of my other posts I've written, there are two of them that specifically stated "and I could be wrong". And even in the message you replied to I stated "I've had to admit hundreds of times I was wrong".

So either:

1: You didn't read my post and just want to argue, in which I'm not taking the bait and even if you reply I will ignore the message.

or

2. This is one of those posters the moderator has mentioned before as baiting and trying to get an argument going. In which I will not take the bait and ignore future messages.

or

3. Stalking specific posters trying to start an arguments with them just because of their moniker. In which case I will not take the bait and will ignore future messages.

And that is my humble opinion that is verifiable by my say so.

You have yourself a nice night there.

I find it interesting that when someone disagrees - sm

[ In Reply To ..]
they are accused of stalking. Yet, it seems that there are pleas for discussion. I can only conclude: Disagreement = Stalking. Agreement = Discussion. I am sure all posters here are open-minded enough to figure this out.

Stalking mean waiting for certain posters to post and always going after them - just because of their moniker

[ In Reply To ..]
That's what stalking is. Waiting for a certain posters to post something then coming back to argue with them and cut them down. Much different than a disagreement. Disagreements are most welcome. I learn a lot of things I didn't know from people I disagree with. Stalkers and drive-by's not so much.

I too agree. I believe posters here are open-minded, and I'll even add intelligent, enough to know the difference.

In my opinion you are wrong - sm - Anony2 far more correct than you

[ In Reply To ..]
Now you are all knowing and omnipotent? You read every single line of every single positive anony2 has ever made in the history of this board? How do you know she did not apologize to someone? Prove she didn't. Should we all disregard your posts since there are no facts, no links, no posts to back up your sweeping, general, blanket statement about a complete stranger? This post proves the hypocrisy of so many on this board. Just sayin'

Posting links can be important - mbmt

[ In Reply To ..]
I think posting links to back up a comment, especially if not a personal opinion, can be important. I could be wrong, but I think that you are the person that posted the following: When I read the background of all his czars and find out some are devoted communists and the speeches they are giving are trying to convince the audience that we need a communistic country. Were you the person that posted that?

I did a search and came up with some very questionable websites, in my opinion, that discussed this (most appearing to lean very far to the right). I could not, however, find anything verifiable to back up this comment. That being said, if it is not just a personal opinion and there is any substance to the claim, then it would be helpful to have access to the information that you have.

Posting links can be important - why - You don't believe anything

[ In Reply To ..]
unless it comes from MM, HuffPo or some other equally "far-leaning" left rag. When posters put up links, you always comment about their not being believable, their facts (according to you) are off, they got it from "very questionable websites". That's why posters don't feel obligated to put up links. You don't have to go to any WEBSITES. Try reading what these cabinet members wrote in their speeches. Try reading the books they personally wrote. Try viewing the speeches they made. You don't have to get any of that info from any "far-leaning" website...it comes right from their own mouths and pens.

Yes and no - anony2

[ In Reply To ..]
Posting links can be important. However, I see so many posters who post links and if someone doesn't like what it says they shoot back with not credible, unreliable, they don't like the person who wrote the article, it's not a big famous place like NYTimes or MSNBC so its not credible or trustworthy. I've seen links to articles from Fox and its shot back with "Faux not credible". Drudge - not credible. Rense - not credible. WND - not credible. Dick Morris - not credible. Media Research - not credible. Breitbart and Savage - not reliable. Glenn Beck - right winger. Etc, etc. However, we hear MSNBC - okay, Huff - Reliable. Daily Beast - okay. Daily Kos and Media Matters - Reliable. Raw Story, Think Progress - okay, etc.

If you hear it from Beck you are wearing a tin foil hat, right winger, ignorant and stupid, but if it comes from Rachel Maddow your right on top of things.

For these reasons even if a poster feels very strongly about a topic they will post their opinion and not put a link. Because if we do we are called nasty names. Then the name calling goes back, comes back to us, etc, etc.

If a person has an opinion about something they should be able to discuss it here without someone coming back making them prove why they have their opinion. Instead of having a decent debate on what someone of the opposite side has heard they get a bunch of flack because they didn't post a link to back up their opinion. Sometimes I form my opinion about things but I don't particularly like to share with the world why I believe things. I'm in my 50s now. Why should I have to explain every decision and idea I make as though I'm a child in grade school.

Every person interprets different websites as "questionable". But sometimes the information they share may be correct, and on the same hand it's possible that someone from a liberal leaning website could be correct. We all need to do our own research on whatever subject matter is being discussed and come to our own conclusions. I don't need someone else trying to prove to me why they believe they are correct. If someone believes what Farrakhan said about Obama being the next savior I don't want you to keep trying to prove to me why you think he is. That is not your job, it is my job to find out all the information and make my own decision. That's all I'm saying. We are all responsible for doing our own research and coming to our own conclusions about whether or not we agree with someone's opinion.

Next, yes I am the one who posted what you asked. Here is why I believe what I wrote. Here is a link you were asking me about. This is where I learn a lot about him and what his viewpoints are.

http://vanjones.net/

I've also heard him speak to audiences of people. Truthfully I cannot tell you where I heard it. He was on TV one time a year or so ago. I can't tell you word for word what he was saying. I liked him at first, but then I kept listening to his message and started realizing what he wants. He calls is progressive, which in all truth is just a nice word for communism. I form my opinions around what I hear him say and what I read on his website and other articles. I think back along I might have read an article about him and what he was doing while a czar from either Drudge or Rense. I read a lot of articles on those sites. Honestly I cannot tell you because it was probably a year or so ago. So with all that, listening to him speak I formed my opinion that he is a devout communist. I don't like his ideas. They are communist ideas and I really don't want to have to explain it word for word to anyone. That is just what I believe. I think it's the wrong direction for our country. If I wanted to live in a communist country I would go to Venezuala or Cuba or Russia. But I don't. I prefer to live in a free country.

Now I want to state this and I want to make sure I'm clear about this. I could be wrong. I do not believe I am, but there is a possibility that I could be. I've been wrong many times before and if I'm wrong I'll admit I'm wrong. My mother and father taught me there is nothing wrong with that. We are not always right and to think so you set yourself up for lots of failures. I certainly don't have all the answers as I saw one poster say. I don't have the answers. I wish I did. But since I don't I have to look at all situations and make up my own mind with all the information I read, see and hear. And believe it or not I do read liberal sites. DH told me if you stick with one version, the one I like, and I never read the opposition I'll never know if I'm right or wrong. So I read what different sites write and then I make up my own mind what I want to believe. There used to be a poster on this board a year or so ago. She was liberal and I very conservative. I forget her name but I loved her posts. After reading some of what she wrote I changed my mind on a lot of issues. Mostly social issues but I still believed conservatively on other issue. Like I'm for gay marriage and I believe we should not be at war with all the innocent lives being lost. But I also believe if you are going to protest the war under the republican president you should also protest the war under a democrat president (or vice versa) Back then there nobody on this board was blaming anyone for the mess we were in.

Just because I don't agree with everything Obama and the administration is doing that does not mean I only listen to Fox and Rush and Palin and it's insulting when posters don't want to have a decent conversation, but throw that at you knowing they are insulting you.

Just wish the hate and blame and assumptions (on all sides) would stop and it could go back to the way it was.

I hoped I explained my viewpoints a little better. Please nobody flame me because these are all my opinions.

Thanks for the link - mbmt

[ In Reply To ..]
Thank you so much for the link. I was truly impressed by how well you expressed your viewpoints, even if they are greatly different from mine. I too am in my 50's and can understand that we should not have to explain everything we think and feel like we are small children.

I suspected one of the people you were talking about was Van Jones. I read the information on his website and have also heard him speak and do not think he is a communist, but that is just my opinion. I take it that he just went through a period in his life when he sort of entertained some of those ideas and later decided differently. There is a link posted below that I feel explains this.

http://www.eastbayexpress.com/ebx/the-new-face-of-environmentalism/Content?oid=1079539

Thanks for the link - mbmt - Van Jones still active commie

[ In Reply To ..]
Van Jones did not go through a "period in his life". He still continues to embrace the communist agenda and partners with those that share that viewpoint. He has made speeches through his White House days and after (actually almost his entire adult life), embracing, promoting Communism. He did not decide "differently". Van Jones has stated he is a Communisut, but you don't "believe" he is. I am sure Van Jones would be amused at the gross naivete of it all. The man states it himself, in his own words, out of his own mouth and yet you don't "believe" he is. Just goes to show you how closed-minded, biased and how much in denial posters are on this board when things to line up with the way THEY think things should be. What does it take to convince someone like you that refuses to believe the man himself? Makes no sense at all. Just sayin'

Van Jones - mbmt

[ In Reply To ..]
I posted an article that explains what he meant by that. You certainly have a right to your opinion, but I still say he is no communist.

There in lies your problems mbmt - sm

[ In Reply To ..]
Your ONE article means nothing when Van Jones HIMSELF says he is a communist, and yet you still call Van Jones a liar. Guess you know better what is in Van Jones' head then he does. Exactly why your posts are pointless....you state the originator (Van Jones) doesn't know what he believes, but you know what he believes. It is easier getting through 12 feet of concrete than those that refuse to remove the blinders.

No need to be insulting - mbmt

[ In Reply To ..]
I have probably been on this earth longer than you or at least as long, so I really do not need you to tell me what I understand or that I have blinders on. I also do not have all of these "problems" you seem to think I have.

There is a section on Van Jones' website that I have copied the link for below that clearly states that he is not a communist. There is also a link to the article that I posted earlier, which is also on this part of his website, that explains the whole communist thing and how that came about.

There are communists living in the United States, but there are probably not as many as most would think by reading this message board. It does seem like anyone in the middle or slightly to the left of middle gets labeled at this point in history as being a socialist, communist, Marxist, etc. I never have been labeled like that before until I hit this message board, but, of course, I know those are the popular slogans that are slung by the right to those of us not leaning their way. Have a nice evening!

http://vanjones.net/index.php?p=truthaboutvan

No insults posted to mbmt - you need to - stop reading into posts what is not there

[ In Reply To ..]
Copy all the links, websites you want...Will go with what Van Jones continues to say in support of coummunism and his practice thereof. BTW - Seen you post some pretty nasty, rude, insulting comments. Just sayin'

Like what? - mbmt

[ In Reply To ..]
nm

I disagree. - sm

[ In Reply To ..]
In a court of law, the "burden" is upon the person to prove it's true, to provide corroborating evidence.

A lot of what is posted here is just fantasy with no truth involved.

I am most definitely going to take a post with a corroborating link MUCH more seriously than a temper tantrum from someone who is spitting lies.

This is how I believe a debate or a discussion..sm - anon

[ In Reply To ..]
should work. The OP of a thread states their opinion or makes their case and then posts a link that led them to believe their opinion. Readers who disagree with the OP them post a link supporting their side.

I think poster is trying to get "a pass" - sm

[ In Reply To ..]
To post any chain mail, bogus blog they want and have everyone say, "Oh, isn't that nice." If it takes me 15 seconds to blow the lie out of the water, I guess I have to continue to do so.

carry on - goldie

[ In Reply To ..]
You are free to interpret posts in any way you want, but there was no hidden meaning or ulterior motive in my post and I can tell you that I'm not trying get a "pass" for anything. I've never posted any chain mail, bogus blog or lie and really don't appreciate the insinuation. You must have me confused with someone else.

carry on; that's what they do when they - Conservative

[ In Reply To ..]
hide behind unsigned posts. If a poster is so sure or convicted of what they are posting, why hide? As I have said before, I no longer post any links for all the reasons mentioned. I am confident in my research, my intelligence and certainly my common sense. If someone else is not, then that becomes their problem. There are boat-loads of information that any poster can access and it does not have to be limited to any particular website, blog, or writer. I prefer to go directly to source materials of the actual person being discussed whether it is Obama, Obama cabinet members, or anyone else. Unfortunately, too many are far too lazy to do that. It is far easier to demand it from others, then call them a liar when they disagree or the other endless, God-awful names that have been posted here. More often than not, as what has occurred with your post, you are then accused of writing posts you did not and the cycle starts again. We are all adults (or should be) on this board and should be computer savvy enough to locate books and articles on any public person or topic we want, when we want, as extensively as we want. Why does anyone have to be limited to what another poster chooses to provide? No common sense in limiting your knowledge solely to what someone else knows.

Similar Messages:

Dec 28, 2009
By Daniel TencerMonday, December 28th, 2009 -- 1:47 pm California county GOP launches campaign to out 'liberals posing as Republicans' In a sign that the 2010 primary season is beginning to heat up, and is likely to get ugly, a Republican candidate for the Senate has "accused" a rival Republican of being a closeted homosexual. Andy Martin, a journalist from Illinois with a long history of controversial anti-Semitic remarks and the man credited with starting the rumor that Barack Oba ...

Jun 03, 2015
carriers on the Obamacare exchange are attributing proposed double-digit premium increases to next year’s private-market alterations to the New Hampshire Medicaid program. Minuteman Health Inc. — which entered the New Hampshire exchange market this year with the lowest premiums — has requested rate increases ranging from 42 to 51 percent for next year, according to healthcare.gov, the online exchange established by the Affordable Care Act. Maine Community Health Options asked for premiu ...

Feb 03, 2015
. ...

Dec 01, 2012
I am posting a new message because the old thread is so far down the board. A credible source is one which is able to back up their statements with facts. This group does not include Fox News, Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh or CainTV. And believe it or not, even though I have always been liberal, I used to enjoy watching William Buckley and will sometimes read George Will. I wish that Buckley were still alive to give his opinion on the first group I mentioned because I know what it would be. Eve ...

Jan 12, 2010
Please take action to support a comprehensive climate and energy bill. In the last year alone, new evidence has emerged that the climate crisis is nearer—and scarier—than we had believed. Please take action now to urge your Senators to support comprehensive climate and clean energy legislation that will reinvigorate our economy and create millions of new jobs. The stakes are high. We must start cutting our carbon emissions now, or we may soon lose the ability to prev ...

Jul 10, 2012
Too many posts below regarding links. If you want to post a link that is your choice, if you don't want to post a link that is your choice. Nobody here is required to post a link. We are all MTs and know how to do our own research. We can find the information on our own and make up our own minds as to whether or not you want to believe it. However, too many people are posting links only to have others post nasty replies claiming whatever link is not credible and the ...

Nov 01, 2012
Romney's ads airing in the undecided states today, reporting that Jeep is outsourcing to China are called "Wholly inaccurate" by PolitiFact.com and "Clearly misleading" by the Washington Post. In addition, General Motors calls the ad "politics at its cynical worst" while the CEO of Chrysler calls them "Inaccurage". It's time to wake up and recognize the truth. ...

Nov 18, 2016
...and Trump is sending all the right signals so far with his picks. I've been pulling for Bolton for Secy of State, but this morning there's a rumor it might be Mitt Romney. If it's either of those, America's stature in the world would be immediately enhanced - and Trump would have once again shown what it means to be an executive. ...and not just by the people he picks, but also those who've been jettisoned. Pay no attention to the media reports re ...

Jul 16, 2010
Since you keep changing your moniker, didn't know what to call you. But, when I had time, I spent the last 2 days looking up resources. So.....have fun and let me know what problem you have with the below. No blogs are included. Have fun. GW BUSH POLICIES DURING HIS PRESIDENCY 1. Tax cuts: A $1.35 trillion tax cut program—one of the largest tax cuts in U.S. history. Bush argued that unspent government funds should be returned to taxpayers, saying "the surplus is not the ...

Jan 13, 2011
I have often wondered why it is Conservatives are called “right” while Liberals are called “left.” By chance I stumbled upon this verse in the Bible: Ecclesiastes 10:2 (NIV) "The heart of the wise inclines to the right, but the heart of the fool to the left." Yep, that’s it! ...

Jul 17, 2010
What was the reason for your divorce (if any)? Infidelity? Cheating? Other? ...

Nov 13, 2015
I got this in an email and it makes a lot of sense. WHAT IF THEY LEFT? And if they would cut out most of the “you don’t have to work” benefits, someone would have to do these jobs! VERIFIED AS BEING CORRECTLY ATTRIBUTED TO A DENVER POST EDITORIAL REPORTER. WHAT IF THEY LEFT Considering the Denver Post is a very liberal paper I'm surprised they published this. This really shows how the hiring of illegal's is false economic practice. Tina Griego is a Free-L ...

May 06, 2011
I don't know if any of you do this, but every time I forget something, like part of the alphabet or my phone number, I am terrified that I have the beginnings of Alzheimer's Disease. It just happened again a few minutes ago. I was trying to file something alphabetically and momentarily forgot my ABC's or my OPR's in this case. I have no doubt that I can take care of myself right now while I'm in great health, but what if... ...

Apr 07, 2012
Chris Maisano is the editor of Democratic Left and chair of the New York City local of Democratic Socialistsof America.Keep Pushing By Chris Maisano When he campaigned for the White House in 2008,President Obama spoke admiringly of RonaldReagan’s status as a transformational figure whoreshaped the nation’s political order. In his State of theUnion speech and in recent campaign appearances, Obamahas sought to channel the Gipper’s sunny, can-do spirit bydeclaring that “Ame ...

Jan 10, 2010
This man is spot on. It is well worth the watch - a bit long, but true, true, true!! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DmEE61iVhCA ...

May 15, 2011
What does left wing mean? ...

Jun 16, 2011
This from a UCLA professor? I'm honestly shocked. I don't know how others feel, but I actually prefer Drudge to all others because I can get to anywhere from his site - from the extremes of Maureen Dowd to Ann Coulter - from Daily Kos to Daily Caller. From US News & World Report: Book: Liberal Media Distorts News Bias By Paul Bedard Posted: June 16, 2011 The liberal bias of the mainstream media tilts so far left that any outlets not in ...

May 10, 2013
Sharing some perspective on the Benghazi coverage. "...absent in ABCâ��s report is the key point that Obama and various members of his administration referred to the Benghazi assault as a terror attack on numerous occasions shortly after the incident...." "In other words, ABCâ��s 'exclusive' reveals a turf battle, not some cover-up. As it turns out, the story is more about how talking points are generated in the interagency process." The links at the end of the the piece - ...

Jul 31, 2016
We will see a rise of the religious left in this country over the next 100 days, as evidenced by the speech of William Barber at the DNC. If you missed his mini-sermon, it's posted below. Well worth the read. Good evening. my Brothers and Sisters. I come before you tonight as a preacher, the son of a preacher, a preacher immersed in the movement at five years old. I don't come tonight representing any organization, ...

Dec 28, 2013
Don't forget - only three days left to get your incandescent light bulbs, if you can find them. ...

Jan 27, 2017
The Democrat Party claims to be all about: * Immigration * Inclusiveness * Racial/Ethnic equality * Tolerance And lefties in particular claim to be about: * Respecting others' feelings Their latest attack is on Melania Trump. For what, you ask? HER ACCENT! It was blatant in Nov. 2016 at the American Music Awards and has just gotten worse since then. Liberals are laughing at the ACCENT of an immigrant. Only they won't c ...

Oct 19, 2014
As in Kansas, where the Democrat dropped out to allow the Independent to surge, in Alaska the Democrat has consolidated with a former Republican who has become "undeclared" and is running against the establishment Republican right. The left, albeit not as left as in some places, Alaska has its own barometer, is figuring out how to run against the crazies. I hope it works in Kansas and Alaska. http://www.npr.org/2014/10/18/356942426/in-alaska-race-for-governor-demo ...

Feb 16, 2015
You know the left. Those "separation of church and state" folks who completely misunderstand and misapply that constitutional concept in order to keep God, or any mention of Him other than as a curse word, out of the public square. But it's okay for them to try to use churches to get people to sign up for Obamacare. When you hold two opposing ideas in your brain at the same time, it's called "cognitive dissonance", and the only way to do it without your brain exploding is to on ...

Mar 16, 2017
Too funny!!! ...

Mar 18, 2011
I feel like I have a bubble in my ear; hot shower did not help and the doctors\' voices sound muffled in my left ear (the voices in my head are loud and clear though - lol, just kidding). I am hoping this is only a temporary thing. Had no such problem yesterday. ...

Nov 17, 2009
Interesting. http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2009/11/on-president-obamas-bow-to-the-japanese-emperor-an-academic-friend-writes-that-both-the-left-and-the-right-are-wrong.html ...

Mar 03, 2011
http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/left-wing-protesters-call-for-clarence-thomas-to-be-lynched/ ..and you people are worried about the TEA Party? ... look at your own!... sick people here. ...

Jan 10, 2011
see link. ...

Apr 08, 2010
See Link From www.westernjournalism.com ...

Jan 30, 2013
Frankly, these scenarios are very incomplete. These dramatic changes will inevitably drive many others--not even begun to be addressed here. For instance, why would there be self-driving trucks if nobody could buy what they're carrying? Part of what might be likely, short term, anyway: “If you’re 55 years old now and lose your job, the odds of you ever getting hired into what you were doing before is as close to zero as you can imagine. If you are a 12-year-old, you have a very ...