Psychiatrist blames CNN for the LV shooting.
- Thread starter Maggot
- Start date
uh, um.... I'm leaning towards what this guy is saying,,, is correct. Redmanss, and anyone else, do you think that is wrong? After the headlines of nearly everything lately, the following sentence is along the lines of:
"This is the WORST/biggest/STRONGEST/longest/DRAMATIC'EST thing to happen since "three-days ago Tuesday, at 11:38 am" or some other such rot." Everything is always "the worst since" some other arbitrary date, of some arbitrary time-line.
I miss the days of Walter Cronkite when he said "And THAT'S the way it is..." He may not have had the bestest slant on things, but at least it was concise and summarized.
Or is there a point that I am missing?
"This is the WORST/biggest/STRONGEST/longest/DRAMATIC'EST thing to happen since "three-days ago Tuesday, at 11:38 am" or some other such rot." Everything is always "the worst since" some other arbitrary date, of some arbitrary time-line.
I miss the days of Walter Cronkite when he said "And THAT'S the way it is..." He may not have had the bestest slant on things, but at least it was concise and summarized.
Or is there a point that I am missing?
My issue is with who he is calling out as the culprit, single sourcing in that sense. First, he's stumping on Fox to slam a competing network, picking just one out of the whole wide world of the 24-hour news cycle addicts. Blaming CNN? They're all culpable in the glorification of mass shooters, right along with every other crime drama show, channel and movie production that portrays them. Second, he is drawing conclusions between the news media and the demonization of gun enthusiasts, also stating "I'm not trying to speculate, but..." and then proceeds to speculate. No offense there "Doctor", but you're a fucking idiot and a sham to your profession.
My girlfriend has an MS in Forensic Psychology along with her MA in Counseling and Ph.D in Psychology, so I hear this type of thing all the time. Evidence, studies and evaluations build an opinion's foundation and strength, not far reaching conclusions based on hunches. That's what this guy is doing, right along with obviously being emotionally charged in what he is talking about, and to me his entire professional opinion is compromised as a result.
Don't get me wrong though, I do agree with much of what he's saying and wholeheartedly agree the media has it wrong when speaking about gun owners and the Second Amendment. Absolutely they are biased and agenda driven from the top down to get us to cow tow to their will through the perpetual indoctrination of their programming, but calling out one source of it on a competing network without evidence? Totally blew his entire basis of argument and only became a face for the other side to say "See? See?!?! We told you!!!"
Never be strength to the other side of the argument. This guy's emotions got the better of him, he blew it and got himself an article on "Think Progress", when he could have made an intellectually based stand for his beliefs.
It's not what you say, but how you say it.
My girlfriend has an MS in Forensic Psychology along with her MA in Counseling and Ph.D in Psychology, so I hear this type of thing all the time. Evidence, studies and evaluations build an opinion's foundation and strength, not far reaching conclusions based on hunches. That's what this guy is doing, right along with obviously being emotionally charged in what he is talking about, and to me his entire professional opinion is compromised as a result.
Don't get me wrong though, I do agree with much of what he's saying and wholeheartedly agree the media has it wrong when speaking about gun owners and the Second Amendment. Absolutely they are biased and agenda driven from the top down to get us to cow tow to their will through the perpetual indoctrination of their programming, but calling out one source of it on a competing network without evidence? Totally blew his entire basis of argument and only became a face for the other side to say "See? See?!?! We told you!!!"
Never be strength to the other side of the argument. This guy's emotions got the better of him, he blew it and got himself an article on "Think Progress", when he could have made an intellectually based stand for his beliefs.
It's not what you say, but how you say it.
