Announcement

Collapse

Forum Rules - You must read(Updated!)

DISCLAIMER

You agree to NOT use this site or its affiliated sites, services you may have access to as a result of being a member here (subscriber or otherwise), to post items (images, textual material, etc.) that are pornographic in nature, illegal in the United States and/or the country you reside in, support or encourage illegal activities (e.g., terrorism), advertise for your own personal profit, or send unsolicited messages (i.e. SPAM) to members or non-members.

AND

You agree that if any clause or component of this document is found to not be legally binding in a court of law of proper jurisdiction then the remainder of this document shall remain fully binding and in full force.

AND

You agree to NOT hold Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd. (makers of the forum software), uspoliticsonline.com, sites affiliated with uspoliticsonline.com, its administrators, its moderators, others associated with its operation, and its owners liable for any and all of the following (in whole or in part):
Personal insults/attacks by other members.
The content posted by other members, whether directed at you personally or a label/classification you associate with. This includes remarks you consider to be libelous or slanderous in any way.
Any financial or time loss due to your participation here or as a result of something you read at this site, including posts/PMs by other members and feature(s)/software available at the domain uspoliticsonline.com.
The dissemination of any personal information about you as a result of either your negligence (e.g. staying logged into a computer that others have access to) or willingness to post such information on a public and or private forum, private message or chat box. This includes using your real name or other details that could allow other members and/or the general public to determine your true identity. You are prohibited from using your real name on these forums, either as your username or in posts / PMs you write.

FORUM RULES, IN ADDITION TO THE DISCLAIMER

1. These rules apply to all sections of USPOL, including public and private forums, blogs, and visitor messages.

2. You cannot attack and/or personally insult someone. You cannot bait other forum members; this includes referring to posters by derogatory terms. Please, remain courteous and respectful to all forum members at all times. You agree to take responsibility for reporting such posts when you come across them. Please, use the ignore feature if need be. Any member who intentionally and continually posts inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages with the primary intent of provoking readers into an emotional response, or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion, may be regarded as a troll by staff, and have their account suspended or banned.

3. You cannot harass (sexually or otherwise) other members. This includes malicious, slanderous, or defamatory comments. If you are not sure if something you write is inappropriate or not then don't say it. Err on the side of caution.

4. Copying and Pasting Articles, and Starting New Threads. You cannot simply cut and paste in posts or when starting threads. You MUST provide the identifying information (source, author, date, and URL). You must also offer some original thoughts along with the cut and paste. You may copy and paste an excerpt or series of excerpts from the article. Excerpts really shouldnt be more then a paragraph or two. Furthermore, if you use images or other copyrighted material in your posts or signature you must have permission of the copyright holder unless you know for a fact that the image is in the public domain. In addition:
a. It must include the identifying information; e.g., where available, the author, the publication, the date, the URL.
b. The member must offer some context, including: How did you hear of this article? What is your opinion? Why is it important to you? Why should it be important to forum readers? The more context you provide, the more you assist others in gauging the excerpted information's significance.
c. You may copy and paste an excerpt or series of excerpts, not the whole thing or even the majority of the whole thing to encourage people to read the entire article.

A violation of any of the above will result in the deletion or closing of the post or thread and could earn you a warning or suspension. If you have any questions concering any of the above please PM a moderator and we will be happy to clarify.

5. You cannot post the same thing in multiple forums. You must not open similar threads about the same or a similar topic. You cannot spam the board or send unsolicited messages to members via PM, email or any other means.

6. Do not post off-topic. You cannot derail a thread with off topic posts.

7. You cannot shout in posts. This includes posting in all CAPS, bold, lIkE tHiS, and extra large font. Posts should also be one color, although you may use an additional color for highlighting ideas you wish to address.

8. You may not alter quotes in a way that misrepresents what was originally said.

9. Multiple accounts are not allowed. If you are found to have more than one account all accounts will be permanently terminated.

10. You cannot have a user name, avatar, signature, or post images that are deliberately offensive. That includes the display of overly explicit or graphic images that may not be suitable for minors.

11. Signatures can not have more than three lines of text, with a font size no larger than "4", and no more than two font colors. Images in signatures cannot be any larger than 800 pixels wide x 200 pixels tall. Animated images are not allowed.

12. You are prohibited from taking any action to disturb the use of the services by others, distribute material that contains viruses, spyware or any other malicious code or harmful programs. This includes interfering with the working of the network, attempts to gain unauthorized access to a service or other computer systems that are part of the site or any other site, by use of the available services.

13. Discussion of moderation actions in public and/or private forums is not permitted. Moderation actions include warnings, suspensions and the editing or deletion of posts. If a member has a concern about a moderation action, he or she is invited to address it with the board staff via Private Message. This rule exists to protect the privacy of all posters with regards to disciplinary action. The moderator team will never publicly discuss the warnings/suspensions of any posters, and we ask that you return the favor, whether about yourself or another poster. Posting about moderation actions in the public forums constitutes a violation. You are free to discuss a moderation action via Private Message with the moderator involved, but you may not harass or abuse the moderators (as already specified in the forum rules). In practical terms, this means that once a moderator tells you his or her decision is final, no further PMs about that moderation action are permitted. If you have a concern about a moderation action, you are free to appeal to a Forum Administrator via Private Message. You may only discuss moderator activities or discussion of moderation with staff member if you chose to private message and are not under any circumstances allowed to use the PM function to forward or promote moderator discussion in regards to specific forum action, amongst other regular members. Administrators do reserve the right to read said PMs and may do so ; if that results in discovery of messaging between posters of such moderator discussion then it will lead to the same violation being received for discussing said moderator actions on the forum. If you receive a message to the effect of having been given moderator information, please report it to a member of staff. Engaging back in that discussion with the original violator will earn you just as stiff a sanction.

14. Do not ignore moderators or administrators. Do not repost something a moderator or administrator has deleted. You cannot have moderators or administrators on your ignore list.

15. Only post in English. Short passages in foreign languages may be acceptable if its use seems helpful for the ongoing discussion and when there is no indication of a potential violation of the forum rules. Always provide a translation into English in such cases. In case of doubt, the incident will be regarded as a violation, no matter of the actual meaning of the foreign language text.

16. The use of words/comments etc. written by other posters, without approval of the poster in your personal signature is not allowed nor are references, by name, to other posters allowed.

17. Please pay attention to announcements by Forum staff that will be found in the "Welcome! / News & Announcements" forum from time to time.

18. Use of "liar", "lies", "lying", etc. Accusing someone of being a "liar" or similar accusations towards other posters will generally be regarded as implying an insult and therewith as a violation of the forum rules. "I question the validity of your statement because...", "That's not the truth" or "you are wrong about that" are sufficient for any decent discussion if you want to disagree with somebody's assertions.

19. Thread opening restriction for new members. In order to control SPAM, new members must have moderator approval to start their own threads.

20. Thread titles must relate to the discussion within. Do not make misleading titles, or titles such as "Guess what..." or "You'll never believe this...". Members need to be able to identify the general gist of the thread via the title. Profanity in thread titles is not permitted.

21. Forum members are instructed to use forum tools and abilities for their intended purposes and no other. If members identify a forum glitch or weakness of any kind that allows you to see or do something you know you shouldn't, please report it. Being aware of any unintended access to the Forum and failing to take appropriate steps to notify staff of said access issues, will create a presumption of seeking to take advantage of the issue, will result in either account suspension, or banishment.

22. Any link to a site that contains graphic content, must contain a warning describing what a person might reasonably expect to view if they click on said link. No graphic pictures are to be posted on the Forum.

23. Threats or advocations of violence toward a public figure, or member of the Forum, will not be tolerated. Conversation about revolution or the like is not prohibited by this rule; directly calling for violence is, eg It's time to kill every <redacted> that voted for the bill, is not permitted.

24. Accounts with no posts will be deleted after 30 days. Inactive accounts with low post histories may be deleted after one year.

25. Private forums are something offered to members that decide to contribute directly to this site via donations. These donations help immensely in keeping this site up and running. Private forums are designed to allow the contributing member discuss whatever he/she wants to and to have the power to direct that discussion in whatever way he/she chose. They were not designed nor are they intended for simply talking trash about members that don't have access to the forum. While the targeted members cannot see the forum or the comments, it creates a negative atmosphere that really isn't necessary. If you want to totally rip apart ideas, ideologies, political parties, etc. that is fine. We simply ask that you don't use the private forums as a means to attack other members that aren't privy to such comments. It is difficult enough to have a political discussion forum because the discussion of politics is inherently heated as people are so passionate about their beliefs...the ones that take the time to come to such a site in the first place at least. The idea of private forums is so people of similar political persuasions can discuss whatever they want without fear of being attacked. Nonetheless, we hope that a certain level of maturity would foster itself within such an arena and not simply lend itself to a bashing forum.

Private Forums are governed by all of the above Forum rules. In addition:
  • Private forums that essentially become abandoned homes will be subject to deletion, donation or reorganization. Just like elsewhere in life, clubs sometimes lose their vitality and purpose for a myriad of reasons. If it becomes clear that a private forum has clearly lost its vitality and nobody is going to really use it anymore, owners are advised to consider whether to reuse the forum for something new and productive rather than let them linger or notify the Administration that the forum should be rearranged for other purposes, closed, merged with other compatible private forums, donated to others for new purposes, etc. Do not be concerned that your forum must be a membership and post count race with others to avoid falling under this policy; the question is whether your forum has actual vitality instead of being 'brain dead.'
  • Additionally, private forums may only be owned by subscribed members in the Platinum or Diamond categories.
  • Should the owner of a private forum be banned, quit USPOL or otherwise abandon the forum the PF will be transferred to another owner or closed.
  • Propriety of private forums. Administration staff will determine the desirability of a proposed private forum and enact any conditions upon it to ensure its purpose is productive.
  • Any and all instances of sharing accounts by allowing someone else to log in under their own account so they can see into private forums for which they are otherwise not permitted to access, will be deemed violation of the double account rule and all caught doing so will be permanently banned.
  • Relaying private forum posts and information to other posters who are not members of the particular private forum for any negative or destructive purpose (eg mean-spirited gossip, fueling interpersonal disputes, etc), is not permitted, and will constitute a violation of the Forum rules.
  • For purposes of monitoring USPOL Terms of Service Administrative staff (not Moderators) will have access to Private Forums.
  • All Private Forums must have at least one active Administrator as a member for purposes of handling issues which cannot be addressed through moderation permissions.
  • Discussion of moderation activities is prohibited on the open site and is likewise prohibited in Private Forums.

26. The administrators and moderators reserve the right to edit and/or delete a post,and/or close a thread, and/or delete a thread at any time if of the opinion that the post is too obscene, inappropriate, or the discussion has run its course.

27. 'Back seat moderating' is not allowed. If you take issue with another poster's contribution to the forum, you're welcome to report any posts you think are out of line, but you should not bring it up publicly within the forum.

28. Images in posts (whether embedded or hot linked) must be reasonable in size. 800x800 should be considered a good rule of thumb. Excessively large images make it difficult for users on mobile devices to load pages. If necessary please simply link to very large images using the URL tags. In addition, the following images are not permitted (including, but not limited to pages with images or videos containing):
  • Strategically covered nudity
  • Sheer or see-through clothing
  • Lewd or provocative poses
  • Close-ups of breasts, buttocks, or crotches

29. Any solicitation or communication involving sports betting / gambling / online casinos / bookies and or internet based card or slot machine systems or sites will lead to all said content being physically removed from the site and server, and will lead to any and or all parties involved being permanently removed and banned from the site to the farthest extent possible. This includes any links to any form of bookmaker, casino, any type of game or match or event where money transfers on the outcome or link of any sort to wire act violations and or anything in violation of either the Internet Gambling Regulation, Consumer Protection, and Enforcement Act, Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006, or the Federal wire Act. This applies not only to the open forum but all and or any chat rooms, articles, private messages and or private forums. All content that violates this rule will be deleted, without notice.

CONSEQUENCES

Failure to comply with any of the forum rules may result in your posts being edited or deleted and/or your account being temporarily or permanently banned from the forums. U.S. Politics Online uses a warning system that generates an automated Private Message to members when they are in violation of Forum rules. The decision to issue a warning is left to the discretion of the moderator or administrator handling the violation. If a member does not agree with an action taken by a moderator, they can appeal to an administrator after seeking clarification from the moderator who issued the warning/infraction and appealing to them in the first instance. Members MAY NOT harass a moderator or administrator by sending excessive PMs when they are discussing an appeal.

Violations are assigned a point value. Points are valid for 30 days. When a members earns 10 points, their account will be automatically suspended: five (5) days for a first suspension; ten (10) days for a second suspension; and twenty (20) days for a third suspension. If a member incurs an additional 10 points after having served three periods of suspension, then they will be permanently banned from the Forum.

Point values are as follows:
Zero (0) points Warning
Two (2) points - Minor infraction / Non post infraction (minor) / Off topic posts / spamming
Four (4) points - Academic dishonesty / Baiting / Discussing moderator or administrator actions / Implying an insult / Minor insults / Moderate infraction / Non-post infraction (moderate) / Thread dumping
Six (6) points - Direct insult at another member / major infraction / Non-post infraction (major)
Ten (10) points - Act of criminality, or advocating thereof

The administrators and moderators also bear the right to issue warnings, temporarily suspend or ban posters for continued trolling or other serious misconduct (eg. professional spamming) even if the poster has not yet reached the maximum warning points or suspensions level. Other options if the above consequences do not seem adequate include placing the member in a moderation queue, which means all posts will have to be approved before they are posted to the board.

PRIVACY POLICY

All information obtained by the end user via the registration process is for internal purposes only and will not be sold to or shared with any third parties. However, if the end user participates in illegal activities and a court of proper jurisdiction orders U.S. Politics Online to release certain information about said user then we will act according to the law. Furthermore, no information will be released on threat of a lawsuit, attempted or actual intimidation, or due to any other reason except as notated in the first sentence of this paragraph. Nonetheless, keep in mind that the information we do have is very limited and generally only consists of the IP address a member uses.

SUBSCRIPTIONS

U.S. Politics Online offers several subscription plans to help cover the operational costs of the site. As a thank you for your donation, you will receive special added benefits meant to enhance your U.S. Politics Online experience. Plans vary in price, starting at only $0.05/day, and benefits vary with the price. Benefits include ability to go straight to new posts, to search the forum, larger avatar, private forums, invisible mode, photo gallery, email, web hosting, and no advertisement banners. Please, click here for more details.
See more
See less

Media Bias and the Information Revolution

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Fomenting hate and division with lies is all they serve us today.

    Yet

    Some of us wonder why fewer are watching or reading... Really ?

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    If media elites continue to avoid facing the music for their deceit, public distrust in the media will continue to rise.

    The media have yet to hold themselves accountable, hyping up both sides of political protests, often sending conflicting groups into an event by riling them up with salacious headlines. The media have also circumvented blame for setting race dialogue back decades by focusing on stories of racial divisions as opposed to stories of racial unity.

    Despite attempts by anti-Trump pundits to blame these figures on President Trump for popularizing the term "fake news," the media will soon have to reconcile how they have been complicit in their own faltering credibility.

    According to the last media survey from McLaughlin & Associates, voters who see anti-Trump bias in the news media outnumber voters who don't at about a 5-to-1 clip. In 2018, the mainstream media aren't even attempting to camouflage their hyper-progressive bias.

    ...


    https://www.americanthinker.com/arti...y_is_dead.html

    ?


    • #32
      Originally posted by Marcus1124 View Post
      There are several types of "bias" which can occur, some of which are inherent to what they do:
      1. Occurrence related bias - reporting on things which happen, rather than things which do not (unless the absence of something happening is particularly unexpected).
      2. Conflict related bias - a tendency to be more prone to report on conflict rather than harmony
      3. Bad news bias - summed up nicely in the "if it bleeds it leads" cliche
      4. Simplification bias - The tendency to present an issue as being binary in nature (either this, or that) rather than as a range of far more subtle trade offs
      4. Political/ideological - covering (or choosing not to cover) in a manner which advances the individual or organizations partisan or ideological preferences.
      Among this interesting list I am trying to determine which number best applies to the press bias regarding the January 18th incident at the Lincoln Memorial.

      The irresponsibility of the press was immense and arguably slanderous.

      See Video: The Truth in 15 Minutes

      A little bit of #1 with a whole lot of #5. What is not included on your list is fake news just completely making it all up. We have supposed journalists too lazy to perform any actual research. Add to this a search for stories that fit into their pre-determined bias. In combination you have political hacks loosely associated with truth masquerading as neutral journalists.

      As if the story is not pathetic enough these lazy journalists use the cesspool of Twitter to confirm their biased views. Pick three anonymous comments from basement dwelling wack-jobs and add it to the end of your story as some kind of this is what people think conclusion. What a pathetic excuse for journalism.

      When you watch the Lincoln Memorial video you will see Phillips and his buddies celebrate after the kids left to the bus. Sneering, I got him man. We won grandpa. It is stunning how the MSM managed to spin this incident the way they did. Of course, it all started by believing every word out of Philips mouth regardless of conflicting video evidence. These kids are receiving death threats specifically due to MSM malpractice. They ought to be ashamed.

      ?


      • #33
        This is what I've been saying for a long time !

        This is massive, gross manipulation by lies & fraud.

        Now it's being recognized all around, written about everywhere...

        Thank heavens !

        We must not allow the "media" to get away with this.

        ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Have you sensed a pattern in the way stories like Jussie Smollett's hoax or the Covington kids' confrontation take over your social media?

        Do you read or listen to the news regularly, wondering in advance how each story can be spun?

        Is it increasingly frustrating to see facts distorted to bolster hate and fear? Have you been aware of pain you feel as you watched loved ones being fed lies by sources they trust?

        If you answered yes to any of these questions, then you are the victim of emotional and philosophical warfare. There is a type of hostile tactic that's been given a new name: DARVO.

        I reached out to Jeff Giesea, an entrepreneur and information warfare expert based in Washington, D.C. He describes DARVO as "a tactic of abusers when confronted where they deny, attack, and then shift blame. The term came from studies of emotional abuse and sexual trauma, but DARVO behavior shows up in many contexts."

        He also views it as "a form of psychological warfare."

        DARVO is a behavioral response that perpetrators use when met with their own wrongdoing. It is an acronym for Deny, Attack, Reverse Victim and Offender. As Mr. Giesea puts it, "DARVO is a gaslighting tactic to shift blame."

        While the area of academic study on this response has been focused on sexual abusers in intimate relationships, it does happen on a much broader scale.

        It is a tactic of manipulation so broad that most people in the developed world encounter it on a daily basis just by looking at their smartphones.

        "I'm frankly seeing significant DARVO behavior from the media towards Trump supporters.

        When the media genuinely screw up, they often shift blame instead of taking responsibility," says Jeff Giesea.

        Trump-supporters now find themselves in an abusive relationship with the "free press" and their own elected officials. Constant attacks on Trump and his base have become so normalized that any contradiction to that narrative seems only to fuel more attacks.

        That's because the social engineers need you to get upset. Once an idea has been propagated, and even if it's wrong or not even an argument, there's already been so much disruption in emotion and personal thought that it becomes easier and easier for the offender to successfully use DARVO.

        Mainstream news has mastered this art by using sensationalized headlines, or pushing stories that should be critically examined, to engage an emotional response in the reader.

        This has the immediate effect of the target being less likely to use rationality and judgment while reading. While involved in emotional processing, the reader might have contradictory thoughts himself or attempt to process other confusing stimuli, such as opposing argument that seems logical, causing him to lose trust in his own mind.

        You may have noticed it recently when the Jussie Smollett hoax finally unraveled, and media and pundits were forced to answer why they had so eagerly used an uncorroborated story to push their ideological agendas. The people who had first shown empathy for Smollett's story were not the least bit relieved that the actor they claimed to have love and support for hadn't been the victim of a hate crime.

        Instead, many denied that the revelation could challenge their stereotypes about Trump's base and used it as an opportunity to justify more villainization of MAGA-supporters.

        They claimed that the "real victims" were the ones now silenced by "Trumpsters' giddiness" over being vindicated that they weren't really what they had been misaligned as.

        Sen. Cory Booker was one of the first politicians to jump at Jussie's story and used it to push his anti-lynching legislation in the Senate. Even though no lynching occurred, even if Jussie had been telling the truth, Booker quickly related it to his own agenda anyway. When confronted by a reporter after the story of the hoax broke, Cory Booker immediately went into denial by saying "information is still coming out." Then he went on the attack by saying, "Bigoted and biased attacks are on the rise." This switched the roles of the actual victims of Jussie's crime, Trump-supporters, to victimizers, when he implied that the problem isn't hate crime hoaxes, but "right-wing terror attacks." Deny, Attack, Reverse Victim and Offender.

        DARVO is not a new political strategy; charlatans have been using these maneuvers for millennia.

        Ancient Greeks knew them by the name Sophists, with the modern definition of sophistry being "using information to deceive."

        From Plato's noble lie to Machiavelli telling the prince he should be a "great pretender and dissembler," it is used because it historically works. But that does not make this form of informational warfare morally right.

        The DARVO tactic has been used unremittingly by the Left, and Smollett's hoax response was only the latest attempt.

        When the Covington kids received a stream of hate-filled responses to a heavily edited condensed video, the media encouraged it with headlines like "The MAGA Teenager Who Harassed a Native American Veteran Is Still Unnamed, but We've Seen His Face Before."

        When the full context emerged, they did not re-evaluate their own response, but instead doubled down on their rhetoric, like this Emmy award-winning journalist who completed the DARVO circle by reversing Trump as the offender:


        Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has employed DARVO to attack critics of her boyfriend being listed on her staff and being granted a congressional email account. Genuine concerns were raised about her boyfriend's access to the government, but the way the freshman congressman handled it was to deny: "Congressional spouses get [this] access all the time." Then she attacked a person asking the question, calling it "nonsense." The Washington Post ran the story under the headline "Conservatives can't stop obsessing over Ocasio-Cortez. Their latest target: her boyfriend." implying that those asking about an ethical violation were somehow in the wrong.

        Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) was recently condemned by most, including her own party, for anti-Jewish remarks, but when the president was asked his opinion and offered that she should be removed from the House Foreign Affairs Committee, she went full DARVO, responding to the president:

        You have trafficked in hate your whole life against Jews, Muslims, Indigenous, immigrants, black people and more. I learned from people impacted by my words. When will you?


        The authors of a DARVO study tried to use Justice Kavanaugh and the Republicans as an example of the GOP engaging against accuser Blasey Ford, but in order for the technique to have been employed, Ford would have had to really be a victim first. But Kavanaugh was the victim as the Left actively tried to destroy his life with false attacks on his character, villainizing him, all while denying the blatant proof that Ford's accusations were completely unsubstantiated.

        It's not just individual victims and perpetrators, either.

        Mainstream media have hired some highly trained manipulators to use DARVO tactics on all GOP platform issues.

        Gun control by villainizing the people who just want to protect themselves, emotionally equating the right to bear arms with a desire to kill schoolchildren.


        Now, similarly, citizens who support the border wall are finding that they're being condemned as morally corrupt for their political view.

        "Only racists want a wall." According to the Left, if you don't like the idea of infanticide being legal in New York State, then you're really just a misogynist who wants to oppress women.


        This technique is used by social engineers who want you to react a certain way.

        By forcing people to question their own realities by introducing emotional arguments that don't connect to rational ones, they can harness individual self-doubt while disorienting and destabilizing opponents. When this is repeated constantly, the media can destroy some individuals' ability to make sound judgments to the point that they become submissive, just like actual abuse victims. This has the goal of making readers who are easier to emotionally charge for the next, probably uncorroborated, story that rolls across their newsfeed.

        There is a narrative being written of Trump-supporters by liberal media and folks who just cannot handle a Trump presidency.

        They are redefining his supporters as racist bigots, uneducated rednecks, deplorables and Russian bots. This is done not because there's any empirical data that support this, but so Democrats can feel morally superior while they blame their 2016 loss to Trump on issues sheltered in ambiguity.

        Jussie Smollett's political activism has been built on DARVO.

        He crafted his identity on social justice warriorhood and abusing people he did not agree with politically.

        However, he denied any evidence that would have shown him there is no correlation between racism and support for the president. He used music videos to displayed imaginary violence by Trump-supporters and profanity-laced tweets to attack the president and his base.

        When the MAGA hatwearing bigots never actually materialized, he was so desperate that he manufactured a crisis that would manipulate people into believing he was the victim of the people he had spent years abusing.

        The good news is that you have defenses against this psychological warfare. You could confront the perpetrators with explanations of their own tactics, but remember: they want you sucked into their sociopathy.

        No contact is the preferred method for individual victims dealing with abusers and narcissists, but that's difficult to accomplish when the abuser is mainstream media.

        The one thing you can't do is expect that the media will correct themselves, even if it's just offering one line that fights their own imposed hysteria.

        The best strategy is to choose not to engage. In the same manner that you would treat a borderline personality parent or narcissistic emotional abuser, do not engage. If you do not react to their attacks the way they believe and intend that you will, these manipulative maneuvers will have no more power.

        Jeff Giesea suggests, "The most important thing is to recognize DARVO behavior when it happens. Catch your breath and realize, this is what's happening and you are not going crazy. Then evaluate what to do from there."

        Most studies on DARVO suggest that education is key to overcoming the infliction these mental manipulation strategies cause. Since we cannot unlearn information, being able to understand and relay what DARVO is, the more we will be able to recognize when someone is attempting to use this informational deceit on us.


        https://www.americanthinker.com/arti..._the_left.html

        ================================================== ==========


        The full horror of Jussie Smolletts botched plot starting to scare progs

        ....

        https://www.americanthinker.com/blog...are_progs.html

        ?


        • #34
          Originally posted by Captain Trips View Post
          This is what I've been saying for a long time !

          This is massive, gross manipulation by lies & fraud.

          Now it's being recognized all around, written about everywhere...

          Thank heavens !

          We must not allow the "media" to get away with this.
          . . . .
          The media has been getting away with this for many years already, and are only getting worse in their political activism / political propaganda.

          Justice Thomas has suggested that the free press' privileges might be curbed if they don't stop. I'd rather they'd heed the warning, change their behavior, rather than being forced to curb those privileges and freedoms.

          ?


          • #35
            Originally posted by eohrnberger View Post
            The media has been getting away with this for many years already, and are only getting worse in their political activism / political propaganda.

            Justice Thomas has suggested that the free press' privileges might be curbed if they don't stop. I'd rather they'd heed the warning, change their behavior, rather than being forced to curb those privileges and freedoms.
            I would too, but I'm unsure they're able to.

            They've so brainwashed themselves, how COULD they ?

            People that won't listen to logic, real science, history, truth and good sense are lost.

            ?


            • #36
              Originally posted by Captain Trips View Post

              I would too, but I'm unsure they're able to.

              They've so brainwashed themselves, how COULD they ?

              People that won't listen to logic, real science, history, truth and good sense are lost.
              True, they are lost. However, they are completely convinced in their beliefs and would refuse to listen to logic, real science, history, truth and good sense thinking their beliefs are all those things, when clearly they are not. In fact, they continue to accuse those who have the audacity to hold different opinions and positions as not listening to logic, real science, history, truth and good sense, so, yes, they are that far gone already.

              ?


              • #37
                Originally posted by eohrnberger View Post
                True, they are lost. However, they are completely convinced in their beliefs and would refuse to listen to logic, real science, history, truth and good sense thinking their beliefs are all those things, when clearly they are not. In fact, they continue to accuse those who have the audacity to hold different opinions and positions as not listening to logic, real science, history, truth and good sense, so, yes, they are that far gone already.
                It's all emotion & fantasy with them.

                Never works managing real people & issues in the real world.

                Just TRY to tell them that ! See what you get ... it's not even worth it.

                ?


                • #38
                  Originally posted by eohrnberger View Post
                  The media has been getting away with this for many years already, and are only getting worse in their political activism / political propaganda.

                  Justice Thomas has suggested that the free press' privileges might be curbed if they don't stop. I'd rather they'd heed the warning, change their behavior, rather than being forced to curb those privileges and freedoms.
                  Hypocrisy are us !

                  DNC dognutz Chairman Tom Perez says;

                  "Recent reporting in the New Yorker on the inappropriate relationship between President Trump, his administration and Fox News has led me to conclude that the network is not in a position to host a fair and neutral debate for our candidates," DNC Chairman Tom Perez said in a statement provided to Reuters.

                  Anyone intelligent, alive AND AWARE could say the same thing back;

                  "Recent awareness of biased reporting on the "News," of the inappropriate relationship between the DNC, and the mainstream media has led us all to conclude that these networks aren't in a position to host a fair and neutral debate for our candidate," Whitehouse press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders said in a statement provided to the citizens of America.

                  Then the article says;

                  The DNC's decision is a rerun of the 2016 primary election, when it turned down Fox's multiple offers to host a debate, citing the network's longstanding conservative bent and prominent criticism of Democratic policies. At that time a Democrat, Barack Obama, occupied the Oval Office.

                  So they can get away with denying a network to host a debate, because that network doesn't have the proper liberal slant ???

                  This can't be !!!!!!

                  But it is !!!!!!

                  "Sorry, no access. We can't allow you to host a debate because you don't think like we do."

                  Ahhhh, that great love for diversity they keep telling us about !!!

                  But. But where is it ?

                  Things certainly don't seem very diverse !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

                  Seems to ME that we have to think, behave and speak certain ways, or we will be given the old "access denied" !

                  Then they get really wild-n-crazy and say;

                  The New Yorker earlier this week reported on "seamlessly" close ties between Trump and the television network founded by Rupert Murdoch, citing an expert on presidential studies who said Fox is the "closest we've come to having state t.v."

                  THEY SAY FOX IS THE "closest we've come to having state t.v." ?????????????????????????????????????????????????? ???

                  Actually that designation belongs to networks that are OBVIOUS REPRESENTATIVES OF THE RADICAL ARM OF THE DEMOCRAT PARTY !!!!!

                  THE STATE !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

                  ABC, CNN, CBS, ABC, PBS... A FEW OTHERS I may have forgotten.


                  ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                  President Trump blasted the Democratic National Committee on Wednesday for refusing to let Fox News host a Democratic primary debate and threatened to do the same thing with other networks during the general election.

                  Democrats just blocked @FoxNews from holding a debate. Good, then I think Ill do the same thing with the Fake News Networks and the Radical Left Democrats in the General Election debates! Trump tweeted Wednesday.

                  The DNC said it will not allow Fox News to host any of its candidates' political debates through 2020, citing a report this week about the conservative channel's ties to U.S. President Donald Trump.

                  "Recent reporting in the New Yorker on the inappropriate relationship between President Trump, his administration and Fox News has led me to conclude that the network is not in a position to host a fair and neutral debate for our candidates," DNC Chairman Tom Perez said in a statement provided to Reuters.

                  "Therefore, Fox News will not serve as a media partner for the 2020 Democratic primary debates," Perez said in a statement, first reported earlier on Wednesday by the Washington Post.

                  Representatives for Fox said they hoped the DNC would reconsider and let some of its journalists moderate a Democratic presidential debate.

                  The DNC's decision is a rerun of the 2016 primary election, when it turned down Fox's multiple offers to host a debate, citing the network's longstanding conservative bent and prominent criticism of Democratic policies. At that time a Democrat, Barack Obama, occupied the Oval Office.

                  Trump, a Republican seeking re-election in 2020, has stoked polarization between the two U.S. political parties by appealing to his base on Twitter and television and policy speeches while simultaneously publicly attacking and feuding with prominent Democrats.

                  The New Yorker earlier this week reported on "seamlessly" close ties between Trump and the television network founded by Rupert Murdoch, citing an expert on presidential studies who said Fox is the "closest we've come to having state t.v."

                  The article went on to describe the access and interviews that members of the White House have granted exclusively to the network.

                  As the field of competition to become Democrats' next presidential nominee grows ever more crowded, the party has decided to split its first primary debate over two weeknights this summer. Twelve people have already jumped into the race and the DNC has capped each debate night at 20 candidates.

                  The party's primary debates this year will mark a sharp reversal from its last round of contests, when less than half a dozen politicians appeared at a handful of debates that were televised on Saturday nights and other times with notoriously low television viewership.


                  https://www.newsmax.com/headline/tru.../06/id/905799/

                  ?


                  • #39
                    Not much to argue against what you posted there Cap't.

                    Accusation have been made from the left that Fox News is 'propaganda'.
                    Once again, we can see the left accusing others of what they themselves are doing. <*Yawn*> It's getting boring, tiresome, and repetitive. They need to come up with a new shtick.

                    ?


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by eohrnberger View Post
                      Not much to argue against what you posted there Cap't.

                      Accusation have been made from the left that Fox News is 'propaganda'.
                      Once again, we can see the left accusing others of what they themselves are doing. <*Yawn*> It's getting boring, tiresome, and repetitive. They need to come up with a new shtick.
                      And as strange as it may seem, I never watch Fox news.

                      It's just impossible not to see & point out such obvious lies & hypocrisies offered by the Dimwitted National Committee.

                      These people think Americans are completely stupid !

                      ?


                      • #41
                        Originally posted by Captain Trips View Post

                        And as strange as it may seem, I never watch Fox news.

                        It's just impossible not to see & point out such obvious lies & hypocrisies offered by the Dimwitted National Committee.

                        These people think Americans are completely stupid !
                        I think the DNC knows exactly how stupid, or perhaps filled with confirmation bias, their supporters are, and work not one iota harder than they have to to convince them.

                        ?


                        • #42
                          Idiots at Fox are making Muslims a victim group.

                          Looks like Fox is maybe dumber even than the regular alphabet channels LOL ... I'm happy to say I never watch Fox : ) even though I get accused of it often

                          Funny how Islam will be the newest victim group - ignoring what Islamists regularly do to people all over the world of course - but when some nut goes and shoots up a Christian church we'll hear .......

                          ...................nothing..


                          We sure won't hear words like Christianphobia used.

                          There sure won't be a nationalized movement to promote, protect and help people learn about the great things Christians have brought the world and why diversity is so wonderful and how we should welcome Christians and "the Christian view."

                          No, we'll see more hate & nastiness for believers in Christ, that's what we'll see.

                          Proving again the hypocrisy, double standards and hate in liberals.

                          -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                          The outrage industry has claimed a temporary victory at Fox

                          ..the suits at the nations leading cable news outlet pulled Saturday nights episode of Justice with Judge Jeanine off the air with no explanation.

                          Stephen Battaglio of the Los Angeles Times infers, it is pretty obvious what this must be all about:

                          the switch appears to be related to Pirros March 9 comment about Rep. Ilhan Omar ( D-Minn.), who wears a hijab, a traditional head covering worn by Muslim women.

                          Is her adherence to this Islamic doctrine indicative of her adherence to Sharia law, which in itself is antithetical to the United States Constitution?

                          Pirro said
                          in the scripted opening of her March 9 program that dealt with Omar, a popular target of conservative pundits since she entered Congress.

                          Fox News, which typically stands by its hosts when they make controversial statements, issued a public rebuke of Pirro over the comments about Omar.

                          We strongly condemn Jeanine Pirro's comments about Rep. Ilhan Omar, Fox News said in a statement. They do not reflect those of the network and we have addressed the matter with her directly.

                          This move seems to confirm Richard Baehrs grim assessment that the slaughter of Muslims in New Zealand has changed the momentum of American politics, putting concerns about Jew-hatred in the back seat (or maybe the trunk), while Islamophobia acrtivists sit in the drivers seat, turning us left.


                          https://www.americanthinker.com/blog..._at_least.html

                          ?


                          • #43
                            Originally posted by Captain Trips View Post
                            Idiots at Fox are making Muslims a victim group.

                            Looks like Fox is maybe dumber even than the regular alphabet channels LOL ... I'm happy to say I never watch Fox : ) even though I get accused of it often

                            Funny how Islam will be the newest victim group - ignoring what Islamists regularly do to people all over the world of course - but when some nut goes and shoots up a Christian church we'll hear .......

                            ...................nothing..


                            We sure won't hear words like Christianphobia used.

                            There sure won't be a nationalized movement to promote, protect and help people learn about the great things Christians have brought the world and why diversity is so wonderful and how we should welcome Christians and "the Christian view."

                            No, we'll see more hate & nastiness for believers in Christ, that's what we'll see.

                            Proving again the hypocrisy, double standards and hate in liberals.

                            -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                            The outrage industry has claimed a temporary victory at Fox

                            ..the suits at the nations leading cable news outlet pulled Saturday nights episode of Justice with Judge Jeanine off the air with no explanation.

                            Stephen Battaglio of the Los Angeles Times infers, it is pretty obvious what this must be all about:

                            the switch appears to be related to Pirros March 9 comment about Rep. Ilhan Omar ( D-Minn.), who wears a hijab, a traditional head covering worn by Muslim women.

                            Is her adherence to this Islamic doctrine indicative of her adherence to Sharia law, which in itself is antithetical to the United States Constitution?

                            Pirro said
                            in the scripted opening of her March 9 program that dealt with Omar, a popular target of conservative pundits since she entered Congress.

                            Fox News, which typically stands by its hosts when they make controversial statements, issued a public rebuke of Pirro over the comments about Omar.

                            We strongly condemn Jeanine Pirro's comments about Rep. Ilhan Omar, Fox News said in a statement. They do not reflect those of the network and we have addressed the matter with her directly.

                            This move seems to confirm Richard Baehrs grim assessment that the slaughter of Muslims in New Zealand has changed the momentum of American politics, putting concerns about Jew-hatred in the back seat (or maybe the trunk), while Islamophobia acrtivists sit in the drivers seat, turning us left.


                            https://www.americanthinker.com/blog..._at_least.html
                            Meh. Seems Piro pushed her luck just a little bit too far this time around. <*shrug*>
                            Every time I caught a little bit of her show, I came away thinking she over stated and went too far.

                            It would seem that Fox is policing their own far own far more so than the rest of the alphabet channels are policing theirs.

                            ?


                            • #44
                              Originally posted by eohrnberger View Post

                              Meh. Seems Piro pushed her luck just a little bit too far this time around. <*shrug*>
                              Every time I caught a little bit of her show, I came away thinking she over stated and went too far.

                              It would seem that Fox is policing their own far own far more so than the rest of the alphabet channels are policing theirs.
                              Yes, we can't offend some "sensitive" group out there.

                              Some things to think about after 9-11.

                              9-11, AND so many other attacks on America by ISLAMISTS !!

                              Now they're working IN OUR government, OPENLY mocking America with their demand to wear their head coverings IN CONGRESS !

                              ... and we allow it.

                              America is weak, and it's obvious.


                              -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                              ..rather than being seen as a threat, many see Rep. Omar as a victory of American culture over the inherent divisiveness of a hate-filled world.

                              However, her many anti-Semitic comments since she has taken office intensify the debate.

                              She talks about the Jewish power through "Benjamins" ($100 bill pictures of Ben Franklin), about AIPAC buying illegitimate influence, and about Jewish dual loyalty to Israel as well as the USA (with no mention of her possible triple loyalty to the USA; Somalia; and Islam, which is as much a political as a religious system).

                              Her defenders, like Speaker Nancy Pelosi, say these comments are reflections of mere rhetorical inexperience, and not of deep-seated anti-Semitism.

                              Acceptance of Jewish people is not just a matter of current events, but part of the foundation of liberty in this country.

                              In effect, then, her comments blew her cover.

                              She cannot simply be seen as a highly motivated immigrant who has made her way to one of the higher offices in the land, someone who is simply living out the Horatio Alger ideal of rags to riches in America.

                              She has revealed herself as someone with an agenda, an agenda where she is willing to attack the community most in favor of Islamic immigration and the diversity she seems to represent.

                              Not only is she filled with intolerable hatred, but she is a kind of Trojan horse.


                              ..the appearance of vulnerability belies monstrous problems. Is she just a poor, misguided foreign-born child? No way. Rather, her presence as a welcome dispossessed minority runs parallel to a story by that great writer, Isaac Bashevis Singer, "The Gentleman From Cracow."

                              ....

                              Omar, along with Rashida Tlaib, and some other Dem fellow travelers who are delighted to see "diversity" in Congress, are human doors leading to untold diabolical strategies.

                              We must remain vigilant as the danger of further militant Islamic encroachment in our government grows. We cannot forget that there have already been multiple murderous attacks on innocents in our beloved USA by militant Islamists, who, like Omar, hate Jews and Israel.

                              In other words, the voices against her are not sufficiently condemnatory, whether those congressional voices be Jewish or non-Jewish. Excluding her from the House would be an optimal response, but research into this option indicates to this writer that this is not feasible.

                              Thus, while removing her from the House Foreign Relations Committee would be a weak and insufficient action, it is the strongest possible action that can be taken to demonstrate that as a country, we are resolute against the thinking and speech she has exhibited.

                              Additionally, major Jewish organizations should do what the Left would do if it were belittled in the same way as Omar has denigrated Jews.

                              They should picket the offices of Nancy Pelosi and Ilhan Omar.

                              Signs should read "Jew-haters resign" or "America is not a land of hate." At the same time, the picketers should be chanting, "It's not too late to stop the hate!" Let's start seeing this on the evening news.


                              https://www.americanthinker.com/arti...lhan_omar.html

                              ?


                              • #45
                                Originally posted by Captain Trips View Post

                                Yes, we can't offend some "sensitive" group out there.

                                Some things to think about after 9-11.

                                9-11, AND so many other attacks on America by ISLAMISTS !!

                                Now they're working IN OUR government, OPENLY mocking America with their demand to wear their head coverings IN CONGRESS !

                                ... and we allow it.

                                America is weak, and it's obvious.


                                -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                ..rather than being seen as a threat, many see Rep. Omar as a victory of American culture over the inherent divisiveness of a hate-filled world.

                                However, her many anti-Semitic comments since she has taken office intensify the debate.

                                She talks about the Jewish power through "Benjamins" ($100 bill pictures of Ben Franklin), about AIPAC buying illegitimate influence, and about Jewish dual loyalty to Israel as well as the USA (with no mention of her possible triple loyalty to the USA; Somalia; and Islam, which is as much a political as a religious system).

                                Her defenders, like Speaker Nancy Pelosi, say these comments are reflections of mere rhetorical inexperience, and not of deep-seated anti-Semitism.

                                Acceptance of Jewish people is not just a matter of current events, but part of the foundation of liberty in this country.

                                In effect, then, her comments blew her cover.

                                She cannot simply be seen as a highly motivated immigrant who has made her way to one of the higher offices in the land, someone who is simply living out the Horatio Alger ideal of rags to riches in America.

                                She has revealed herself as someone with an agenda, an agenda where she is willing to attack the community most in favor of Islamic immigration and the diversity she seems to represent.

                                Not only is she filled with intolerable hatred, but she is a kind of Trojan horse.


                                ..the appearance of vulnerability belies monstrous problems. Is she just a poor, misguided foreign-born child? No way. Rather, her presence as a welcome dispossessed minority runs parallel to a story by that great writer, Isaac Bashevis Singer, "The Gentleman From Cracow."

                                ....

                                Omar, along with Rashida Tlaib, and some other Dem fellow travelers who are delighted to see "diversity" in Congress, are human doors leading to untold diabolical strategies.

                                We must remain vigilant as the danger of further militant Islamic encroachment in our government grows. We cannot forget that there have already been multiple murderous attacks on innocents in our beloved USA by militant Islamists, who, like Omar, hate Jews and Israel.

                                In other words, the voices against her are not sufficiently condemnatory, whether those congressional voices be Jewish or non-Jewish. Excluding her from the House would be an optimal response, but research into this option indicates to this writer that this is not feasible.

                                Thus, while removing her from the House Foreign Relations Committee would be a weak and insufficient action, it is the strongest possible action that can be taken to demonstrate that as a country, we are resolute against the thinking and speech she has exhibited.

                                Additionally, major Jewish organizations should do what the Left would do if it were belittled in the same way as Omar has denigrated Jews.

                                They should picket the offices of Nancy Pelosi and Ilhan Omar.

                                Signs should read "Jew-haters resign" or "America is not a land of hate." At the same time, the picketers should be chanting, "It's not too late to stop the hate!" Let's start seeing this on the evening news.


                                https://www.americanthinker.com/arti...lhan_omar.html
                                Geez. dude. There's no "OPENLY mocking America with their demand to wear their head coverings IN CONGRESS !".

                                It's called religious observance, and that's fine. It's the same as Christians wearing a cross, or an orthodox Jew wearing a Yamaka, or anything else similar.
                                What's not fine is the rank antisemitism of Omar's public statements, nor the rest of the congressional Democrats giving such statements cover and protection.

                                I mean, let's call a spade a spade.

                                ?

                                Working...
                                X