Did I miss your article on the bipartisan trip of 71 congressmen/women to Israel recently? The trip that Reps. Ilhan Omar and Rashida Tlaib refused to join, instead planning a trip to push the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement against Israel? Instead of an AP "brief" that only connected Trump's urgings to Netanyau, your paper never explained the Israeli law on the books for BDS activists, instituted when the girls' (read "women of color') true mission was laid out.

Then, the verbally vulgar Tlaib reneged on a subsequent arrangement to allow her to see her aged grandmother, again playing the victim, using more anti-Semitic sentiment.

Did I also miss the factual followup of Christine Blasey Ford's allegations against Judge Brett Kavanaugh? Ford planned it all well in advance. Did I miss Beto O'Rourke's teenage imaginings of running over children? Just fiction, or cause, with his arrest record (daddy is a judge and father-in-law wealthy) to consider him for a red flag law? Or the black chief editor of The New York Times caught on tape planning a massive "race" propaganda push to supplant the failed "Russia Hoax."

More facts, less political pandering, less inflammatory innuendo, please. And please minimize use of the AP cherry-picked articles omitting whole truths.

Sandra Woodford

Texas City

Locations

Recommended for you

(42) comments

Bailey Jones

Yes, please print every AP article everyday.

Carlos Ponce

When you see the AP logo attached to an article CAVEAT LECTOR!

Carlos Ponce

This newspaper isn't big enough to print every AP article. Many AP political articles show Liberal bias - not worth the ink to print them.

Emile Pope

First, they are Congresswomen not "girls". Second, repeating disproven conspiracy theories and misinformation doesn't make it factual. It's the Associated Press not Alternative Propaganda. Good luck in your world...

Carlos Ponce

"Alternative Propaganda" - that's a good name for them, Emile. Thank you! Not all AP stories have a Leftist bent but most of their political stories seem to be.

Carlos Ponce

"Congresswomen not 'girls' " - I didn't know Emile was a member of the PC POLICE. Do you get a badge with that? One definition of "girl" is "an immature woman". Appropriate on the op-ed page. Any objection to Supergirl's name? What about the "Beach Boys"? Politically incorrect?

Emile Pope

Actually Supergirl was a high school student and the Beach Boys were all teenagers when the band was formed. Congresswoman Omar is 37. Tlaib is 43. Pressley is 45. And AOC is 29. They should not be referred to as "girls"...

Carlos Ponce

In the current televised version, Supergirl is full grown who revealed her super powers to the world after getting a job.

At their debut in 1962, Brian Wilson was 19, Carl Wilson - 16, Mike Love - 21, and Al Jardine was 19 but became 20 during their debut. While three of the four were teenagers, only one was considered of minor age and three were legally adults. Now, consider their ages today.....

Gary Miller

EMILE>Would political HAGS be OK?


Jim Forsythe

Would it be ok to call the President, boy Trump. Of course not, just as calling a adult Woman a girl is wrong , unless she ask to be addressed as such. Reality is not some TV program or what a entertainer calls themselves, and they are the one's asking to be called such..

No Boys or girls where going on the bipartisan trip, as they are all adults.

Carlos Ponce

"Would it be ok to call the President, boy Trump. He's been called far worse by Liberal pundits, Jim.

Randy Chapman

Girls is a better word than what many are calling this group of four.

Jim Forsythe

Just because someone calls someone a name, does not make it right. Of course we have a President that labels people with names, but it still does not make it right. Carlos just as I would not call you a boy, no one should be calling adults girls or boys.

Carlos Ponce

If Jim called me "boy" it must be because of my youthful exuberance not my balding head.[beam]

Jim Forsythe

I would never call any adult, a boy or girl. When we become adults, we are no longer juvenile's, and should be addressed as adults.

Most people have a preference that like to be called, and this should be how they are addressed.

Carlos Ponce

Jim, you are bothered by the least important things. Doubtful they have any importance at all!

Guess you never called John Boy Walton, John Boy because he originated the role when he was 20 and continued the role until 1997 when he was 46.

Jim Forsythe

Again with the TV. I never called John Boy, as he would not have answered because he was a fictional character. Richard Thomas's character was named John Boy , so that was his name on the show. If I had known Richard Thomas, I would have called him . I do not think that he was called John Boy in real life.

In life. people are addressed by their given name, unless they prefer some other moniker.

Carlos Ponce

"I do not think that he was called John Boy in real life." Many people called actor Richard Thomas "John Boy" and many continue.

Jim Forsythe

These are fans of the show addressing the charter that he played. He allows them to call him this, which makes it OK. If he did not allow this name, it would be disrespectful of the fans. Again with the TV!

Richard Cacioppo

Couldn't agree more. Newspapers should report news, not just promote their view of the world. Editorials is your vehicle to sell a particular point of view. Print news, all news, without the subtle leanings of the progressive/socialist slant. Otherwise, face the consequence of newspapers around the country with declining patrons.

Kelly Naschke

I only read AP stories for one reason...to see how long it takes to uncover the bias.

Gary Scoggin

If you have Internet access, which apparently everyone here does, why get national and international news here? There are plenty of other sources out there. It is quite easy to find one that fits your particular bias.

Bailey Jones

Those "other sources" are the problem. Being constantly told that your opinions represent the moral center of the universe is intoxicating. When you come out into the light and discover that the rest of the world doesn't necessarily agree with you, it hurts your feelings. It's only human nature to lash out. The only alternative is to accept that different viewpoints are also valid. But that knocks you out of the moral center. You could wander around in a daze of doubt for hours before you can get back to your favorite commentator who puts everything back into the correct context - with you and yours in the center. So much easier to change the newspaper than to change your mind.

Don Schlessinger

Aug 27, 2019 12:54pm, So Bailey you're obviously above all that. Please tell us who we should be listening to, watching and reading to raise us up to your lofty position of enlightenment.

Bailey Jones

A variety of factual news sources - including at least one that doesn't represent your own bias. (In my case that would be Fox News.) Whenever possible, go to the original source material - whether it's a speech, law, video, etc. - so you can evaluate it in its original context. As many history books as you can find - so you can see for yourself how the exact same language you're hearing today was used in the past (no one learns, nothing really ever changes). Biographies of people you respect, and those you don't. Political philosophy - the history of modern political movements. The Great Courses is an excellent resource. Be suspicious of anything that reinforces your own biases, listen carefully to anything that challenges them. Own your own prejudices and understand how they limit your ability to appreciate other viewpoints.

Emile Pope

That would involve work. Easier to let others do your thinking for you and tell you why you're right...

Gary Miller

The liberal media functions as a truth filter. They print what they want readers to believe. Believe many don't think it happened unless a liberal prints it.

Gary Scoggin

This exact comment also applies to those who get their news from FoxNews. Talk about a filter!

Randy Chapman

The only difference is that FoxNews is the truth. Liberal media is insanity at best.

Gary Scoggin

Thank you for helping make my point.

Carlos Ponce

Witness the Lawrence O'Donnell (MSNBC) fiasco. He came up with unsubstantiated remarks against the President. When challenged as to its veracity, it was like a rerun of SNL's Emily Lietella - "Nevermind!" Insanity or stupidity?

Gary Scoggin

I'm no fan of Lawrence O'Donnell but I'll say this: He screwed up - badly - by going with a thinly sourced and unverified story. He then reversed himself, admitted his mistake, retracted his story and apologized. Not a great momment in Journalism but at least he made an effort to correct his error.



When was the last time you saw Sean Hannity or Tucker Carlson do that? Or are they Trumplike in their perfection in that, like the President, they've never made a mistake?

Carlos Ponce

"When was the last time you saw Sean Hannity or Tucker Carlson do that?"

Gary Scoggin, can you give an example of a remark made by Sean or Tucker that needed retracting?

Their sources are vetted, verified by a third party so if you don't commit the crime you don't have to pay the fine.

Bailey Jones

'Witness the Lawrence O'Donnell (MSNBC) fiasco." Sorry, I missed it - I'm not a fan. Paid commentators are no source for news, doesn't matter whether they are paid by opinion makers on the left or the right. I came across a very interesting article yesterday that describes a theory for the way that partisan issues and opinions arise. They call it "opinion cascades". I'd call it the "lemming effect". This is the article - you can google the paper for more detail. https://phys.org/news/2019-08-chance-ideology-political-polarization.html

Gary Scoggin

"Gary Scoggin, can you give an example of a remark made by Sean or Tucker that needed retracting?



Their sources are vetted, verified by a third party so if you don't commit the crime you don't have to pay the fine."



Carlos - I can never tell when you're being serious. They have a better than even chance of being wrong just by quoting the President. It amazes me how uncritical and unthinking people on the far right are when it comes to vetting their President or their news sources. (This also applies to people on the far left.)

Bailey Jones

Gary, Carlos is being absolutely serious. I have no doubt that he's never heard of a falsehood uttered by Hannity or Carlson. Because he's never googled "Sean Hannity falsehoods."

I challenge anyone who gets information from anybody to do your due diligence. If they quote a sentence out of a speech - go find the speech and watch it in context. (Glenn Beck once spent a whole week on Fox explaining why 20 seconds of a speech Obama gave about funding the Peace Corps really meant that he was raising a secret army to come after conservatives.) If they quote from a news story, go find the story and trace it back to the original story. Talking heads typically only give half truths. A story about how both parties use dark money becomes "THAT PARTY is using dark money!" If they are telling you not WHAT someone did, but WHY they did it - that's a huge red flag. ("This isn't about saving lives it's about COMING FOR UR GUNS!") If they're spouting not about what happened, but what MIGHT happen, that's another red flag - Rachel Maddow is especially fond of doing this. Avoid fear-mongers - before the 2008 election Rush warned that blacks would riot if Obama lost. And blacks would riot if Obama won - because, you know, blacks are just like that. If they're telling you that "people like us" are the real victim - that's another red flag. If you catch them in a lie - and they don't correct it - cross them off your list and stop listening. Don't be a tool. You've been given a brain and the freedom to exercise it.

Carlos Ponce

Some say Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Tucker Carlson, etc. LIE to the American public. When confronted, it's "um, er uh , you can look it up". Hilarious! I looked up what was suggested and came up with über - left wing pundits and web sies - NOTHING REPUTABLE. Take a look at "Salon's number one "lie" allegedly told by Sean Hannity: "Hannity Ignored Overwhelming Evidence to Repeatedly Claim Obama's Policies Have Not Helped Improve the Economy. Hannity praised Obama for extending the tax cuts but the overall 8 year run produced a lackluster economy. That's also the opinion expressed by top economists. And that's Salon's Number One?????

Bailey Jones

It's no surprise that GCDN's most stalwart Trump supporter supports Trump's most stalwart Fox News supporter.

"deep state coup"

"Rich Seth murdered by DNC"

"Obama's birth certificate"

"Hillary selling uranium to the Russians"

"Secret sperm on Obama's official portrait"

"Charlottesville counter-protesters were paid performers"

"Hillary's secret illness" - shouldn't she be dead by now?

"Obama's death panels" - shouldn't we all be dead by now?



Hannity appeared on stage with Trump, and in a Trump campaign ad - yet he's the honest broker of the day's political news?



I think I'll go make a couple of cheesecakes - at least that's productive activity.


Carlos Ponce

It's no surprise that GCDN's most stalwart anti-Trumper takes things out of context.

Did Hannity talk about these topics on his radio or television show? Yes. Is tha lying? No. Take "Obama's birth certificate": Sean states, "Since he [Trump] brought up this issue of the birth certificate on "The View" he's now in a tie for fifth place two points behind Sarah Palin." In the segment, Sean Hannity is asked by Ron Daniels, Civil Rights Activist, "Do you believe Obama was born in America?" Hannity replies "Yes."

Watch the video on Mediaite's "Hannity Goes All-In On Obama Birth Certificate: ‘What’s Wrong With Asking?’ "

https://www.mediaite.com/tv/hannity-goes-all-in-on-obama-birth-certificate-issue-whats-wrong-with-asking/

So bringing up a topic in the news on his program is considered lying? Not in this universe, Bailey.

Bailey Jones

Quod erat demonstrandum.

Carlos Ponce

Bailey tollet de rebus context.

Gary Miller

Mado will report he jumped by telling you why he jumped. Did he tell her why he jumped.

I am a sceptic, always try to vet a story. Rush, Shawn, Tucker and FOX have been accurate more often than CNN or MSMBC. Trump more often than Obama or Pelosi.

Welcome to the discussion.

Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.

Thank you for Reading!

Please log in, or sign up for a new account and purchase a subscription to read or post comments.