More liberal news crap about Flight safety for Conservatives

[dogman_1234]

http://www.cnn.com/2011/TRAVEL/06/07/checkpoint.of.the.future/index.html?hpt=us_t1

 

[dogman_1234]

^ It is from CNN...

 

[jsc]

I'm sorry but what does conservatism have to do with that ^^?

Well, according to Napolitano, we politically conservative, former military personnel are in danger of becoming radicalized.

Seriously, sign me up as a Known Traveler. I have had a Secret/NATO Secret clearance for over 35 years and it is still current. Background investigation should be simple. OTOH, I do fall in that class of people known as "conservative, former military personnel".

 

[Max Collodi]

^ It is from CNN...

You seem to think that because it is from a certain news organization it automatically contains some sort of political bias. As far as I can tell this is merely an article about a proposal to update an aging security system. I see no political bias here. You need to learn the difference between a straight news story and editorializing.

If a news article mentions a fire that took place somewhere and it took several hours to put the fire out, no one was injured and it did 50,000 dollars worth of damage, the story is just a statement of the facts. However, if the writer added..."If voters had approved last months tax package, the fire department could have bought new equipment and the fire could have been extinguished much sooner", then that is editorializing.

I don't think anyone, regardless of their political bent, wants to get on an airplane with a terrorist.

 

[dogman_1234]

You seem to think that because it is from a certain news organization it automatically contains some sort of political bias. As far as I can tell this is merely an article about a proposal to update an aging security system. I see no political bias here. You need to learn the difference between a straight news story and editorializing.

If a news article mentions a fire that took place somewhere and it took several hours to put the fire out, no one was injured and it did 50,000 dollars worth of damage, the story is just a statement of the facts. However, if the writer added..."If voters had approved last months tax package, the fire department could have bought new equipment and the fire could have been extinguished much sooner", then that is editorializing.

I don't think anyone, regardless of their political bent, wants to get on an airplane with a terrorist.

I base it on what is observed by present circumstances...basically, CNN is based on Liberal ideology.

Please everyone, I am just trying to play a card here...not much of a trump if you ask me.


The way I process things seems to offend everyone here.

 

[Max Collodi]

I base it on what is observed by present circumstances...basically, CNN is based on Liberal ideology.

The way I process things seems to offend everyone here.

I don't follow CNN News or any particular news agency so I can't comment on whether or not political bias exists there. My point was that the article you posted did not illustrate a bias. If you feel that the news on CNN tends to promote a Liberal ideology, then you should have posted an article that better illustrated your view.

I have viewed many of your posts and haven't found you the least bit offensive.

---Max