Oh baby, why don't you just meet me in the middle?

[CF DolFan]

Like Ashley Craig says ....
Oh baby, why don't you just meet me in the middle?
I'm losing my mind just a little
So why don't you just meet me in the middle?
In the middle

I think the worst thing about the US today is that we have no middle ground. For instance today ... on places like CNN I read how Democrat's "destroyed" Zuckerberg and made him look foolish while at the same time I see conservative places saying Democrats on the House Financial Services Committee were slammed over their “arrogant,” “inaccurate,” and “embarrassing” attacks on Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg.  The problem is the truth is almost always in the middle and we no longer have a middle ground or anywhere to find it. There is no where to read what happened and only then are you allowed to form your opinion. Any freaking article today is slanted to the point of the author and talking head who is spewing such crap. As a result ... most of us only see things that reinforce our already made up minds and get farther from the people we disagree with.

Do you think we will ever have a semblance of "middle ground" that in the future?

[Fau Teixeira]

Like Ashley Craig says ....
Oh baby, why don't you just meet me in the middle?
I'm losing my mind just a little
So why don't you just meet me in the middle?
In the middle

I think the worst thing about the US today is that we have no middle ground. For instance today ... on places like CNN I read how Democrat's "destroyed" Zuckerberg and made him look foolish while at the same time I see conservative places saying Democrats on the House Financial Services Committee were slammed over their “arrogant,” “inaccurate,” and “embarrassing” attacks on Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg.  The problem is the truth is almost always in the middle and we no longer have a middle ground or anywhere to find it. There is no where to read what happened and only then are you allowed to form your opinion. Any freaking article today is slanted to the point of the author and talking head who is spewing such crap. As a result ... most of us only see things that reinforce our already made up minds and get farther from the people we disagree with.

Do you think we will ever have a semblance of "middle ground" that in the future?

Middle ground isn't popular and doesn't make money so under a purely capitalistic system you won't ever have middle ground reporting.

have you watched al jazeera us ? cause they're pretty straight news middle ground. not very popular tho

[Dave Gray]

I know you don't want to hear this, but CNN is the middle.

So is NBC News, ABC, CBS, New York Times, BBC, NPR, Washington Post.

They may have slightly liberal or conservative editorializing, but they're all levels of fact-based, moderate reporting.

What we're dealing with in Trump is something outside of the norm.  Facts don't have a liberal or conservative bias, whether they support or decry a liberal or conservative candidate.


There is a super-wacky-liberal wing, but it isn't the face of the party -- it's not AOC or Bernie or Warren.  It's not mainstream.  It's weird anti-vax, PETA, truthers, GMOs are killing us, etc.  But those people don't have mainstream coverage or a news channel.

[CF DolFan]

I know you don't want to hear this, but CNN is the middle.

So is NBC News, ABC, CBS, New York Times, BBC, NPR, Washington Post.

They may have slightly liberal or conservative editorializing, but they're all levels of fact-based, moderate reporting.

What we're dealing with in Trump is something outside of the norm.  Facts don't have a liberal or conservative bias, whether they support or decry a liberal or conservative candidate.


There is a super-wacky-liberal wing, but it isn't the face of the party -- it's not AOC or Bernie or Warren.  It's not mainstream.  It's weird anti-vax, PETA, truthers, GMOs are killing us, etc.  But those people don't have mainstream coverage or a news channel.

It's not middle ... not by a long shot. If you can't see that then you aren't looking. There is liberal bias in every single story. To even be considered middle one would have to be able to read a story and have no idea what the author's opinion is. I just spent the morning reading CNN and a little Huffington Post and I could wake up from a coma and know that liberals wrote the stories. The same could be said for FOX NEWS which I typically don't read because I already get plenty of conservatism on my news feed.

[Dave Gray]

^ Facts don't have a bias.

There is less journalism than I'd like in mainstream media.  But it's still there.  And CNN is clear about what is editorial and what is fact, to their credit.

Their stories are detailed as "Analysis: Whatever" or "Opinion: Whatever". 


It's like global warming.  It's not an opinion-based subject.  Your opinion on it doesn't matter.  Report the facts, report on the findings of experts in the field, move on.  Liberal/Conservative doesn't mean equal-time.  That's the bullshit that got us into this.

If it's raining outside and someone has the opinion that it's sunny out, the news has a responsibility to report that it's raining.  That's not liberal.

[CF DolFan]

When all you do is note the liberal side to things it is an obvious bias. For instance ... first article I clicked on CNN about Trump's use of the stupid word "Lynching".  While it does give many facts it goes on to say this "Trump has repeatedly railed against the probe, calling it a "witch hunt" and a "fraud," but Tuesday marks his first use of the term "lynching," which is associated with a period of horrific racial violence in the United States, in regard to the inquiry. Following Emancipation and the Civil War, killings, often carried out in public settings, known as lynchings, terrorized newly freed black Americans. Thousands of citizens were killed this way.

There is no mention of the many Democrats, and others, who have used the word nor how it is common lexicon in our language. The fact Joe Biden even said in his own defense of his use ... "This wasn’t the right word to use and I’m sorry about that. Trump on the other hand chose his words deliberately today in his use of the word lynching which is not only humorous but newsworthy to this story.  If this was a one time off then I'd say well that's just how it was written but time and time again the only "facts" are the ones that support the liberal agenda.

Most liberals I associate with admit there is nothing wrong with the word but ton of hours have been devoted by liberal media to attach it to Trump as being racist. That's 100% deliberate bias.

[Fau Teixeira]

Trump has repeatedly railed against the probe, calling it a "witch hunt" and a "fraud," but Tuesday marks his first use of the term "lynching," which is associated with a period of horrific racial violence in the United States, in regard to the inquiry. Following Emancipation and the Civil War, killings, often carried out in public settings, known as lynchings, terrorized newly freed black Americans. Thousands of citizens were killed this way.

What part of all of that was not a straight fact ? I don't read opinion in that.

[Spider-Dan]

I believe CF is operating under a definition of "the middle" where if the facts make one side look bad, then you have to report something else to either a) make that side look good, or b) make the other side also look bad.

So, for example, if "the middle" were covering Watergate, they should say that Nixon ordered the break-in to the Democrats' offices, but that the Democrats also have their own scandals such as [x].

[pondwater]

When all you do is note the liberal side to things it is an obvious bias. For instance ... first article I clicked on CNN about Trump's use of the stupid word "Lynching".  While it does give many facts it goes on to say this "Trump has repeatedly railed against the probe, calling it a "witch hunt" and a "fraud," but Tuesday marks his first use of the term "lynching," which is associated with a period of horrific racial violence in the United States, in regard to the inquiry. Following Emancipation and the Civil War, killings, often carried out in public settings, known as lynchings, terrorized newly freed black Americans. Thousands of citizens were killed this way.

There is no mention of the many Democrats, and others, who have used the word nor how it is common lexicon in our language. The fact Joe Biden even said in his own defense of his use ... "This wasn’t the right word to use and I’m sorry about that. Trump on the other hand chose his words deliberately today in his use of the word lynching which is not only humorous but newsworthy to this story.  If this was a one time off then I'd say well that's just how it was written but time and time again the only "facts" are the ones that support the liberal agenda.

Most liberals I associate with admit there is nothing wrong with the word but ton of hours have been devoted by liberal media to attach it to Trump as being racist. That's 100% deliberate bias.

You didn't know? Black people OWN certain words. They can say them but you as a white male can't. Seems kind of racist to me.

[Fau Teixeira]

You didn't know? Black people OWN certain words. They can say them but you as a white male can't. Seems kind of racist to me.

no amount of mental gymnastics makes it ok for you to say the N word.

[pondwater]

no amount of mental gymnastics makes it ok for you anyone to say the N word.

There you go I fixed it for you. Anyhow, I think the word "Lynching" was the word being referred to. The definition of the word lynching has no mention of race.

Either certain words are okay to use or they're not. You can't say that people of one race can do something and people of other races can't. That's racism by definition. You know, kind of like telling people of one race that they can't sit in the front of the bus or use a certain water fountain. The hypocrisy of you people is off the charts.

[Fau Teixeira]

There you go I fixed it for you. Anyhow, I think the word "Lynching" was the word being referred to. The definition of the word lynching has no mention of race.

Either certain words are okay to use or they're not. You can't say that people of one race can do something and people of other races can't. That's racism by definition. You know, kind of like telling people of one race that they can't sit in the front of the bus or use a certain water fountain. The hypocrisy of you people is off the charts.

No, that's not the real world, that's some idealistic pretend "hundreds of years of oppression and slavery and systemic oppression no longer matter" world you live in. sorry .. doesn't happen that way.

For example (and seriously why do I even try...) I can (and do) call Dave an asshole on occasion.. usually to his face. If I were instead to call your mother an asshole to her face I have a feeling it would be received in a different way. Who says something matters. Sorry you don't feel like you're in some big N word saying is acceptable club.

[pondwater]

No, that's not the real world, that's some idealistic pretend "hundreds of years of oppression and slavery and systemic oppression no longer matter" world you live in. sorry .. doesn't happen that way.

For example (and seriously why do I even try...) I can (and do) call Dave an asshole on occasion.. usually to his face. If I were instead to call your mother an asshole to her face I have a feeling it would be received in a different way. Who says something matters. Sorry you don't feel like you're in some big N word saying is acceptable club.

So you're saying that since oppression and slavery happened that the pendulum needs to swing the other way to actively oppress other races? Like I said, either everyone plays by the same rules or there are no rules. Pick one, you can't have it both ways.

By the way, you can call my dead mother anything you want, to my face. As long as you don't put your hands on anyone I'm good. As far as I'm concerned words don't really matter. However, on the flip side, don't be surprised when your mother gets called a skank hooker directly to your face in return. Then what?

[Spider-Dan]

So you're saying that since oppression and slavery happened that the pendulum needs to swing the other way to actively oppress other races?

Why, yes: the exact point is that since slavery and the associated racism conferred benefits that continue to be passed down to offspring even today, the scales need to be balanced.

Like I said, either everyone plays by the same rules or there are no rules. Pick one, you can't have it both ways.

So basically, after one group is given a huge artificial advantage for generations, the only fair way to proceed is to let them keep their inherited advantage, and have everyone else start out with a handicap?  Under no remotely reasonable sense of of a fair and just society does "Everyone plays by the same rules" mean "I get to cheat for years, and then after that, everyone (including me) plays by the rules as if my cheating never happened."

What you are saying is libertarian nonsense on the same order as, "We should solemnly respect property rights and oppose attempts to violently take another's land, and on a totally unrelated note, we have determined 'property rights' to exist the moment after we took this land from Native Americans."

[pondwater]

Why, yes: the exact point is that since slavery and the associated racism conferred benefits that continue to be passed down to offspring even today, the scales need to be balanced.
So basically, after one group is given a huge artificial advantage for generations, the only fair way to proceed is to let them keep their inherited advantage, and have everyone else start out with a handicap?  Under no remotely reasonable sense of of a fair and just society does "Everyone plays by the same rules" mean "I get to cheat for years, and then after that, everyone (including me) plays by the rules as if my cheating never happened."

What you are saying is libertarian nonsense on the same order as, "We should solemnly respect property rights and oppose attempts to violently take another's land, and on a totally unrelated note, we have determined 'property rights' to exist the moment after we took this land from Native Americans."

Pure regurgitated non sense. Allowing black people to say "n*****" or "lynching" while prohibiting other groups doesn't right any wrongs from the past. What you're saying is pure unadulterated racism. I'm starting to think that you're an angry racist black man.