Net Neutrality Officially Ended

[Dill]

(06-12-2018, 07:03 PM)bfine32 Wrote: For example there is a current thread where folks are bending over backwards to try to paint the NK summit in a negative light and I guarantee it has 0 to do with the content of the summit. 

I saw a thread about that summit. People were quoting news reports and a copy of the agreement.

Are you saying that comments on that thread make inferences about it which are not rooted in the facts as currently given by news media?

Or is it the "negative painting" you object to, regardless of what the facts allow us to say about that summit?

I ask because Trump, whom you frequently defend, seems to care little for whether people's statements are grounded in some factual record. Rather, his big issue is whether they show him in a positive or a negative light, not whether they are true or false. Hence all the accusations of fake news and disparagement of honest reporters, while his supporters trip over themselves trying to praise him over every little thing.  How would a guy like that construct a cabinet and then operate with it? Wait . . . I just said something negative, didn't I.  Are you judging whether my statement can be grounded in shared observations or just whether it is "negative"?  Would you say your standards of judgment align with or diverge from Trump's?