Fox News

[SilentMajority]

If no one fit your criteria in the last 75 years then, perhaps, your criteria is too idealistic, almost bordering as being on a mythological level?

Idealistic? No clue what you're getting at. I don't idealize the idea of someone being "right-wing". I'm just saying there's no one in the mainstream that comes close based on what I consider "right-wing". The farthest "right-wing" Republican politicians today would probably be far left of Democrats in the 60's or 70's or later. Remember Bill Clinton said "Illegal Aliens" in his State of the Union in the 90's. Do most Republicans even say that anymore even lol?

What's your definition of "right-wing" V? What politicians or prominent media personalities fit your definition?

Tucker Carlson is almost certainly considered "right-wing". He recently came out in favor of gay marriage. Does even support anything "right-wing"? I think he supports not allowing millions of South Americans to illegally cross the border. Is that right-wing now ahahahahahahah?

[yankees60]

If no one fit your criteria in the last 75 years then, perhaps, your criteria is too idealistic, almost bordering as being on a mythological level?

Idealistic? No clue what you're getting at. I don't idealize the idea of someone being "right-wing". I'm just saying there's no one in the mainstream that comes close based on what I consider "right-wing". The farthest "right-wing" Republican politicians today would probably be far left of Democrats in the 60's or 70's or later. Remember Bill Clinton said "Illegal Aliens" in his State of the Union in the 90's. Do most Republicans even say that anymore even lol?

What's your definition of "right-wing" V? What politicians or prominent media personalities fit your definition?

Tucker Carlson is almost certainly considered "right-wing". He recently came out in favor of gay marriage. Does even support anything "right-wing"? I think he supports not allowing millions of South Americans to illegally cross the border. Is that right-wing now ahahahahahahah?

Idealistic generally means having a standard that is usually not met in the practical, real world.

Therefore by your statements it seems like you have quite the idealistic view of what constitutes "right-wing".

My definition is fluid. "Right-wind" is generally represented by whatever the current Republican party stands for.

[SilentMajority]

If no one fit your criteria in the last 75 years then, perhaps, your criteria is too idealistic, almost bordering as being on a mythological level?

Idealistic? No clue what you're getting at. I don't idealize the idea of someone being "right-wing". I'm just saying there's no one in the mainstream that comes close based on what I consider "right-wing". The farthest "right-wing" Republican politicians today would probably be far left of Democrats in the 60's or 70's or later. Remember Bill Clinton said "Illegal Aliens" in his State of the Union in the 90's. Do most Republicans even say that anymore even lol?

What's your definition of "right-wing" V? What politicians or prominent media personalities fit your definition?

Tucker Carlson is almost certainly considered "right-wing". He recently came out in favor of gay marriage. Does even support anything "right-wing"? I think he supports not allowing millions of South Americans to illegally cross the border. Is that right-wing now ahahahahahahah?

Idealistic generally means having a standard that is usually not met in the practical, real world.

Therefore by your statements it seems like you have quite the idealistic view of what constitutes "right-wing".

My definition is fluid. "Right-wind" is generally represented by whatever the current Republican party stands for.

Your definition is fluid?

That explains a lot. Feel free to have the last word. Since you have no real definition of "right-wing", discussing anything related to it with you is a total waste of time. You'll just change how you define it.

When the Republicans support gay adoption and full child tranny conversions, I suppose you will then consider that right-wing. It's like talking to a pile of sand. At any moment a gust of wind will blow and your "position" will completely change.

[dualstow]

Silent, would it kill you to say 'trans'? The whole gender dysphoria is controversial, and I'm possibly on the same side of it as you are, or at least I share your concerns.
But, it's kind of like using the n-word for black people to repeat "tranny" over and over again.

[SilentMajority]

Silent, would it kill you to say 'trans'? The whole gender dysphoria is controversial, and I'm possibly on the same side of it as you are, or at least I share your concerns.
But, it's kind of like using the n-word for black people to repeat "tranny" over and over again.

I can play along with the word game. I promise you the word will change again though, and probably soon. At some point calling a person "trans" will be the n-word equivalent. Then it will be a new word, you cis-gendered, hetro-normative bigot (kidding).

We will have to go back and delete any instance of saying "Trans".

Anyway back to FoxNews........some hosts are better than others, but they support a lot of the left-wing agenda, they just think Republicans can do it better.

[dualstow]

I can play along with the word game. I promise you the word will change again though, and probably soon. At some point calling a person "trans" will be the n-word equivalent. Then it will be a new word, you cis-gendered, hetro-normative bigot (kidding).

Agree 100% Steven Pinker calls it "the euphemism treadmill." Person of color vs colored person shows just how arbitrary it is.

[Mountaineer]

Please correct me if I’m wrong.

What I hear SilentMajority saying is:

Don’t make an idol of any “news” celebrity or outlet.

Right and left are rather meaningless terms, as are democrat and republican.

Sensational topics appeal to the masses.

True character is a diminishing value and not easily discernible.

Political correctness is for snowflakes.

Follow the money.

Pray.

[boglerdude]

^ Never meet your heroes.

https://www.visualcapitalist.com/inflat ... -services/

...since...2000? The AMA should double the amount of doctors.

Biden closing the border? https://www.theepochtimes.com/biden-adm ... 73951.html

[yankees60]

If no one fit your criteria in the last 75 years then, perhaps, your criteria is too idealistic, almost bordering as being on a mythological level?

Idealistic? No clue what you're getting at. I don't idealize the idea of someone being "right-wing". I'm just saying there's no one in the mainstream that comes close based on what I consider "right-wing". The farthest "right-wing" Republican politicians today would probably be far left of Democrats in the 60's or 70's or later. Remember Bill Clinton said "Illegal Aliens" in his State of the Union in the 90's. Do most Republicans even say that anymore even lol?

What's your definition of "right-wing" V? What politicians or prominent media personalities fit your definition?

Tucker Carlson is almost certainly considered "right-wing". He recently came out in favor of gay marriage. Does even support anything "right-wing"? I think he supports not allowing millions of South Americans to illegally cross the border. Is that right-wing now ahahahahahahah?

Idealistic generally means having a standard that is usually not met in the practical, real world.

Therefore by your statements it seems like you have quite the idealistic view of what constitutes "right-wing".

My definition is fluid. "Right-wind" is generally represented by whatever the current Republican party stands for.

Your definition is fluid?

That explains a lot. Feel free to have the last word. Since you have no real definition of "right-wing", discussing anything related to it with you is a total waste of time. You'll just change how you define it.

When the Republicans support gay adoption and full child tranny conversions, I suppose you will then consider that right-wing. It's like talking to a pile of sand. At any moment a gust of wind will blow and your "position" will completely change.

Maybe I did not explain myself well enough. My definition is whatever positions the Republican party is currently holding.

So it's not my position that is fundamentally changing. It follows whatever the Republicans change to.

On what basis does your list of what represents "right'-wing" have any validity?

Show me that verse in the Bible wherein God designated someone to receive the sacred list of all the attributes that represent the political "right-wing". I don't think you are going to find any so it is just your opinion and judgement as to what constitutes the "right-wing". At least with my position we know at any point in time what "right-wing" represents.

[ppnewbie]

I find The NY Times to be the equivalent of Fox News these days. In general I rarely pay attention to any big media right or left. I go to sites like zerohedge.

[seajay]

Show me that verse in the Bible wherein God designated someone to receive the sacred list of all the attributes that represent the political "right-wing".

The bible was mis-translated, as evidenced by the ancients who worshipped the sun, for they knew the true source of gold

In gold we trust

Gold is existent not only for those who believe but also for those who do not

Gold is everywhere

Gold be with you

Gold is good

Au 4 men

[SilentMajority]

My definition is fluid. "Right-wind" is generally represented by whatever the current Republican party stands for.

Your definition is fluid?

That explains a lot. Feel free to have the last word. Since you have no real definition of "right-wing", discussing anything related to it with you is a total waste of time. You'll just change how you define it.

When the Republicans support gay adoption and full child tranny conversions, I suppose you will then consider that right-wing. It's like talking to a pile of sand. At any moment a gust of wind will blow and your "position" will completely change.

Maybe I did not explain myself well enough. My definition is whatever positions the Republican party is currently holding.

So it's not my position that is fundamentally changing. It follows whatever the Republicans change to.

On what basis does your list of what represents "right'-wing" have any validity?

Show me that verse in the Bible wherein God designated someone to receive the sacred list of all the attributes that represent the political "right-wing". I don't think you are going to find any so it is just your opinion and judgement as to what constitutes the "right-wing". At least with my position we know at any point in time what "right-wing" represents.

You win yankees60, I will respond.

Yes, we will know at any given time what "right-wing" represents to you, provided you explain ahead of time that it just represents whatever the consensus Republican position is at the moment. Very clear. When the Republicans support gay marriage and adoption, wars, welfare, abortion, gender neutral pronouns, affirmative action programs, mass immigration into the country, open satanic rituals on the congressional floor, that will all be "right-wing" to you.

Is it obvious that when you strip any possible meaning of a term away......by definition it becomes meaningless? If "right-wing news" and "right-wing politician' is synonymous with "Republican news, and Republican politician", there is no such thing as right-wing anymore, it's just Republican, regardless of any values, virtues, goals, etc. Hopefully this is obvious to most everyone.

By the way the Republicans were the anti-slavery party and the democrats were the pro-slavery party. Was anti-slavery "right-wing" back then? If not, then I guess you're saying they were left-wing and now they're right-wing. Of course they could switch again and then you'd really be in a pickle. How will you figure out what's right-wing if the republicans move to the left of the Dems? I guess the Dems will be right-wing then, who knows. Kinda tough to discuss something when the basic premise of what it is has no definition to one of the people.

[yankees60]

My definition is fluid. "Right-wind" is generally represented by whatever the current Republican party stands for.

Your definition is fluid?

That explains a lot. Feel free to have the last word. Since you have no real definition of "right-wing", discussing anything related to it with you is a total waste of time. You'll just change how you define it.

When the Republicans support gay adoption and full child tranny conversions, I suppose you will then consider that right-wing. It's like talking to a pile of sand. At any moment a gust of wind will blow and your "position" will completely change.

Maybe I did not explain myself well enough. My definition is whatever positions the Republican party is currently holding.

So it's not my position that is fundamentally changing. It follows whatever the Republicans change to.

On what basis does your list of what represents "right'-wing" have any validity?

Show me that verse in the Bible wherein God designated someone to receive the sacred list of all the attributes that represent the political "right-wing". I don't think you are going to find any so it is just your opinion and judgement as to what constitutes the "right-wing". At least with my position we know at any point in time what "right-wing" represents.

You win yankees60, I will respond.

Yes, we will know at any given time what "right-wing" represents to you, provided you explain ahead of time that it just represents whatever the consensus Republican position is at the moment. Very clear. When the Republicans support gay marriage and adoption, wars, welfare, abortion, gender neutral pronouns, affirmative action programs, mass immigration into the country, open satanic rituals on the congressional floor, that will all be "right-wing" to you.

Is it obvious that when you strip any possible meaning of a term away......by definition it becomes meaningless? If "right-wing news" and "right-wing politician' is synonymous with "Republican news, and Republican politician", there is no such thing as right-wing anymore, it's just Republican, regardless of any values, virtues, goals, etc. Hopefully this is obvious to most everyone.

By the way the Republicans were the anti-slavery party and the democrats were the pro-slavery party. Was anti-slavery "right-wing" back then? If not, then I guess you're saying they were left-wing and now they're right-wing. Of course they could switch again and then you'd really be in a pickle. How will you figure out what's right-wing if the republicans move to the left of the Dems? I guess the Dems will be right-wing then, who knows. Kinda tough to discuss something when the basic premise of what it is has no definition to one of the people.

I stand by my position.

Right wing is whatever the current Republican party is.

That said, parties are constantly evolving.

At the time of Lincoln they were a brand new party and their positions on many things were far from what they are today. But that was 163 years ago and a lot of political evolution can take place over that period of time, as it has for the Republican party.

A key point of their evolution was when Johnson signed the Civil Right Act in the 1960s. The Republican party's evolution has drastically slowed down since then but has continued to become more and more what you would consider right-wing, though from your extreme right-wing point of view you believe that they have become liberal.

[Mountaineer]

2AC1D312-CF85-49BF-9F4A-1FFB425A6E2F.jpeg (68.59 KiB) Viewed 5117 times