impartialobserver

Thats the risk that you take when you view the words of a pundit as untouchable truth. They are there to get clicks, ratings, revenue.. not dispense objective fact.

An editorial is going to have some degree of subjectivity.. hence why one should not view it as untouchable fact. The degree of subjectivity is impossible to measure/quantify so therefore there is no way to say definitively is one better than the other.

An editorial is an editorial no matter who produces it. Tucker Carlsen is more about entertainment than information.

while encouraging... should be taken with a grain of sand. Its only one data point amongst many.

I am quite content with life. Politics is like diarrhea. Occasionally, it is necessary and best to get through it and on to something more meaningful and enjoyable.

I come here to pass time between tasks at work. Sometimes, I have to wait on someone and this makes watching paint dry (figuratively speaking) more pallatable.

Hyperbole and American politics are one in the same no matter which side. Welcome to the real world

No, I have not. As someone who likes myself, I do not watch cable news nor read political stuff on Facebook. If someone starts posting political stuff, I unfriend or unfollow them. I get enough politics at work.

Beautiful thing about America is that I can choose to visit his website or not. I watched maybe 2 or 3 minutes of his show and found it to be nothing but hyperbolic gaslighting.

Here is where we differ.. You think that the government has full control over Facebook. I think that they give recommendations and warnings but do not rule over them with an iron fist.

This thread and the folks on here whining about the outcome is not going to change anything. Chauvin had options and chose the wrong one. None of what is written on this thread is going to get his sentence vacated, commuted, etc. It is as impactful to his situation as someone farting in a bathroom in Mexico City.

The fact that you can't see the difference in the two scenarios is hilarious

Bingo... this is why I would have charged with manslaughter or third degree murder. There was no premeditation which can be proven easily. However, the idea that Chauvin was 100% justified in his CHOICES is absurd. He had an array of options and chose one of more violent but unnecessary options.

The law does not care about Floyd saying it before or after. The law is concerned with the actions of Chauvin. The actions of Chauvin were not driven by absolute necessity. Chauvin had options. Actually, if you read the manual instead of relying on someone else.. you would know that the law mandates that the officer has no other option available. Quality of options is not the point.. existence of any available options is.

Hmmm... but the voters are convinced that he is a cowboy. You wearing a tux is not worn to tell something of your background and political leanings. He wears it deliberately to curry favor with them.

Hmm.. ok. They could have left him be and let him go berserk. Chauvin putting the knee to the back of the neck was a matter of choice not necessity. Also, I have read the police procedure manual for MN... care to quote something from it that states this action was of ABSOLUTE necessity?

Maybe when I am bored. Today is not that time. This is just the best example of them being two faced and phony. There are others such as them getting all worked up about unemployment and jobs numbers.. and yet having no clue (by their own admission off camera) as to how they are formulated. Heads up.. this is my wheelhouse and I doubt that you know more than cursory details.

Having read the coroners report and not some second hand source that tries to paraphrase it or summarize it.. it is clear that had Chauvin did nothing, the chance that Floyd dies in the time frame that Chauvin encounters him is slim. Can't say impossible or 0 but very low probability. Had Chauvin simply handcuffed him and left it at that.. Floyd is most likely alive.

Cameras only come on when you are on the job... hence when he plays cowboy.

Carefully constructed life. When on the job.. he plays cowboy. When not on the job, he divorces himself from that role completely. I am not one that respects the dual life, two-faced way of life. You apparently have no issue with it..

"misrepresentation".. wow, who knew that you were so funny. These conservative voters are convinced that he is one of them. Little do they know that he shares only being human and maintaining a body temperature of 98.6 with them. He is not a hunter, fishermen, etc. nor does he own an ATV or UTV. He does not live the same life as them.. not even close. He lives in an upscale neighborhood in Oakland..which by my last check is not in NV. Furthermore.. he does not come from a ranching, farming, or working class background. He was raised upper middle class in sacramento and made the "move" to NV later on.

I guess I deem it worse. In front of the camera, they are fire and brimstone. Off camera.. they just laugh it off knowing they lied and everyone bought into it. Another example.. random politician always in country western attire. So you think that he is from a background of farming and ranching. Yeah... not even close. This one not only is a Republican but also only has a condo in NV while living in the Bay Area when not campaigning. He is a big city elitist who puts on a disguise for the camera.

I will give you one example.. Random politician gets up in front of the crowd and tells everyone that he is not going to put up with them damn illegals and that he is going to do x, y, and z. Well, come lunch time we are discussing usual stuff (economy, jobs, tax revenues) and in unsolicited fashion, he says, "we need them illegals to clean hotel rooms and to be groundskeepers.. so we are going to do nothing"

I get a large enough sample size being that I have been doing this for 8.5 years and we not only work with NV state politicians but frequently work with politicians from ID, MT, UT, MN, MO, MA, CA, and WA. And unlike you.. I get the genuine article not just what you get second hand from someone else or what the politician shows you on camera. You think that they are phony in front of the camera.. they are far worse away from the camera.

I get a cleaner source than the seemingly infinite amounts of content available via the media. I am not getting my data via a secondary source... Mine is first hand..