Leferd

Track and Field coverage through the NBC streaming app is miles better. Different announcing crew, no interruptions, brief bios on most -- if not all the competitors, and best of all, it's live or on demand. There are also separate dedicated feeds of all the field events.

I will never stop being confused why people perceive the most outlandish and emotionally-charged intentions behind my posts, and surely you must understand that from my perspective, when I ask a question and the response may as well be "lol u mad? calm down bro," then I can't help but wonder if it's an attempt to dodge out of the question. Didn't you say you've been banned at a few other message boards? Perhaps it's the way you write and the tone you give off seems emotionally charged to the reader? *Edit* LK, My apologies, I may have projected. It's been a long day --woke up early to catch the start of the marathon. Going back to your question, I'm with her and Hillary Clinton is getting scrutinized just fine in these here message boards =)

Dude, stop hyperventilating. Seeing as I'm for all intents and purposes the only one participating in this thread likely to be voting for Clinton anyway. Aside from Bruce, everyone here has pretty much been quick to go Hillary-bashing.

To be fair, I doubt a lot of left leaning sources are going to roast Politifact for being biased in favour of them. And why should they be doubted just because their findings don't jive with a particular candidate? Whether they are biased or not, they have a methodology and are open and transparent with each of their "fact checks." They explain and source why they come to a particular judgment. Yes, Republicans are on top of their liars list, and Democrats are on the bottom. But, there are truthful Republicans that do very well. It just so happens that the pants on fire Republicans tend to be the demagogues --Trump, Bachmann, Cruz, Gingrich, and Palin. http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2013/nov/01/principles-politifact-punditfact-and-truth-o-meter/ am not sure if we can describe politifact as having a methodology. it is pretty darn subjective. difference 'tween placement o' a claim in one o' two categories is gonna be the result o' a fuzzy kinda internal calculus rather than anything that can be objective discerned. more fundamental is how, or if, a particular claims is chosen to be checked at all. http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/peter-roff/2013/05/28/study-finds-fact-checkers-biased-against-republicans http://www.npr.org/2012/01/10/144974110/political-fact-checking-under-fire trump simple talks out his arse, so is unsurprising when his claims is rated as false, but there has been more than a few liberal political leaders that would appear to get benefit o' the doubt that conservatives do not. HA! Good Fun! "more fundamental is how, or if, a particular claims is chosen to be checked at all." Ok, that's a fair critique and I recognize it. Nevertheless, Politifact, is transparent and specifically addresses these concerns of what claims are chosen and how they measure truthiness on their processes page. Do they target more Republican statements than Democrats? That NPR interview asserts it, and I have no reason to believe it to be false. But, short of a GAO audit, these online fact checkers are the best we have to gauge aggregate candidate truthiness at the moment.

To be fair, I doubt a lot of left leaning sources are going to roast Politifact for being biased in favour of them. And why should they be doubted just because their findings don't jive with a particular candidate? Whether they are biased or not, they have a methodology and are open and transparent with each of their "fact checks." They explain and source why they come to a particular judgment. Yes, Republicans are on top of their liars list, and Democrats are on the bottom. But, there are truthful Republicans that do very well. It just so happens that the pants on fire Republicans tend to be the demagogues --Trump, Bachmann, Cruz, Gingrich, and Palin. http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2013/nov/01/principles-politifact-punditfact-and-truth-o-meter/

I revel in Starship Troopers' unabashed brown-shirted, fascist propaganda glory. Robert Heinlein's quite the character.

Vicodin/hydrocodone got me high. It worked as it was supposed to and I took it as prescribed. I don't have addictive tendencies though, so I never got close to the point of addiction...but damn, it felt good.

This is why our country is in trouble my friend. It one thing to disagree on policy, role of government, what to do next, etc. But Americans can't even agree on what the facts are now. There is no longer a consensus on what is true and what isn't. The media is not what we needed it to be. An impartial source of information. Years ago people like Cronkite & Murrow were trusted. If they said "this is so" then you felt you could believe them. Now, no one is trusted. If Fox runs a story that is negative for Clinton it is dismissed as Fox being Fox. Even if it is a true story. Ditto for CNN/MSNBC/insert name here. That the story might be factual no longer matters because we don't trust the source. The media can only blame itself. It has ruined it's own credibility. And that is a real problem for us. I seriously believe is Americans were better informed Hillary & Trump would not be the nominees of the two major parties right now. Real news is out there, but you have to go find it. Most folks won't do that. They eat what is spoon fed and if that turns out to be poison, oh well. I can agree to an extent. Like I stated in your news source thread, there are plenty of good, diligent reporters and journalists out there. Journalists are allowed to have opinions, but the good ones will report the news as objectively as they can. But remember, being objective is not mutually exclusive with being balanced. Sometimes...many times, things are black and white and a good reporter will call out the BS as conscience and editors will allow. Look, I share some of the misgivings regarding media, but the the bigger problem is with the news CONSUMERS. These days, many are the product of consuming their own echo chambers---reinforcing their own biases. People read and watch things that they already agree with, and if they consume things that may not necessarily gel with their world view....well of course this person is crooked and stupid media are complete shills.

Well...let's see now. News media has something called an editorial board. This editorial board will give their collective editorial opinion concerning matters of the public good. Between Trump and Clinton, it's not a stretch to see where most objective editorial boards will swing. That being said, Clinton is getting called out for the Clinton Foundation donations. She was getting called out on Benghazi. Emails. Her lack of press conferences and interviews with news media. But unlike Trump, her campaign team knows how to answer their questions and move on. In contrast, Trump tends to double down on his controversies and exacerbate the issue.

And of course, you cite sources from such objectively neutral sites like The Weekly Standard, Townhall.com, and CNS News. Right. I mean, literally...RIGHT.

Classic. I suppose Uzbekistan finally got their revenge 800 years later. #TooSoon?

Clinton is not getting a pass from CNN or the major news outlets. It's just when you compare her to Trump's demagoguery, of course Trump is going dominate the airwaves. And not positively.

I see he doesnt mention CNN, he specifically says CBS, NBC and ABC We dont get any of those in SA so I have no idea if they are bias. I just know Trump makes the media scrutinze him....with his new campaign advisors hopefully this should change Or, maybe, just maybe...if Trump isn't such a bald faced liar, or such a crummy candidate, he wouldn't be getting called out so frequently. Mainstream media is doing its job.

Really good hoops for the bronze. But Australia got hosed by the officiating.

Neymar seals it.

Part of it is also unfamiliarity. Team USA regularly use different crews from the heats to the finals. Last night, Rogers ran up on Gatlin. That can mean two things...either Gatlin didn't react quick enough when Rogers hit his mark and started way late, or they didn't properly use the appropriate number of steps to set up the mark. Considering his fast twitch muscles....I'd bet it was the latter upon review of the tape. Either way, it ain't that hard of a fix. And again...switch to the underhand technique. It worked for my relay squads, and it definitely worked for the Japanese.

Another Olympics, another botched Team USA botched 4x100m relay. It ain't that hard. Practice, practice practice. Get your steps right; take off hard when when the mark is hit; hold out your hand when you hear "STICK," then secure the baton. If the overhand baton passing technique is a problem -- and it is, then go underhand.

Adding to the above from the politics thread... For election news and analysis I follow Nate Silver, Clare Malone, and Harry Enten from FiveThirtyEight; David Wasserman from the Cook Political Report; and Sean Trende from Real Clear Politics. David Axelrod and Jon Favreau are former Obama Administration staffers and serve as my Democratic shills. Republican consultants Tim Miller and and Karl Rove cover the right. I follow Sopan Deb of CBS News and Katy Tur of NBC News covering Trump on the campaign trail. My national NBA reads are Zach Lowe of ESPN; Adrian Wojnarowski of the Vertical/Yahoo!; Marc Spears (The Undefeated/ESPN); Sam Amick (USA Today); Marc Stein (ESPN); Matt Moore (CBS Sports); Kurt Helin (NBC Sports); David Aldridge (TNT); Ramona Shelbourne (ESPN); and Rachel Nichols (ESPN). For baseball, I read Rob Neyer, Peter Gammons, Bill James, Rany Jazayerli, Jonah Keri, Jon Heyman, Jayson Stark, and Ben Lindbergh. My football follow is Bill Barnwell, hockey is Katie Baker, and the Men in Blazers got me covered for soccer. Bill Simmons' Grantland is dead and left a deep void in intelligent sports and pop culture writing. Good thing Simmons is now back with The Ringer. FiveThirtyEight is the gold standard when it comes to data journalism. I read The Ringer and FiveThirtyEight quasi-religiously. Father James Martin S.J., gives me the Jesuit perspective on current events and Reza Aslan from progressive Islam. Malcolm Gladwell is an automatic read and podcast listen. I read a lot more people for different things, but they may be a bit esoteric. Google News is my news aggregator.

Ask her on the Twitters. Be sure to tell her you're of Western/Northern European stock.

Shouldn't be a problem avoiding terrible echo chambers if you know what to look for. I follow individual journalists I respect. There are plenty of good journalists out there -- whether as generalists or specialists in their field. I also listen to NPR and APM on the radio. My go-to television news source is PBS.

Right, because conservatives and right wingers don't get their news from Fox, Breitbart, and Newsmax.

Obama was asked by the Governor of Louisiana not to come because of potential for distraction of rescue efforts and advised Trump to not come if he is using the visit as a photo op and for political gain. So of course, Trump is using it for political gain. Meanwhile, Obama is getting regular briefings and communicating via modern telecommunication technologies.

It's "American nationalism", not "white nationalism". SPLC is a lying far-left organization. Gimme a break. It quacks like a duck. Here's Breitbart's front page news editor: http://www.rawstory.com/2015/09/slaves-built-the-us-the-way-cows-built-mcdonalds-and-other-historical-facts-from-a-breitbart-editor/ "British settlers built the USA. "Slaves” built the country much as cows “built” McDonald’s." "Indian tribes never bothered to build any kind of civilization. They killed each other and chased bison. Yawn~" "British settlers and their descendants built civilization. Indians never bothered to build more than a few teepees." "Probably not by cutting hearts out of sacrificial victims, unlike a sacred tradition of a Latin American culture." "Mexicans wrecked Mexico & think invading the USA will magically cure them them of their retarded dysfunction. LOL." "As if Indians could ever build the highly-advanced welfare system that sustains their existence… lol" "Dear “native people,” Where is your space program? Discovery of the wheel? Civilization? Love, America." "LOL, no. Western tradition alone can be credited with creating the civilized world, which youre dying to break into." "Another Crusade would do a lot of good. Let’s turn Mecca into a strip mall!" "When I think about America, the first thing that comes to mind is Islam and Third-World Muslims."

Bolt > All.