look I was simply browsing for an article that referenced how many reegistered voters didn't vote. If I referenced cnn would that be any different? " Former CNN correspondent turned whistleblower, Amber Lyon, analyzes CNN’s response to a series of stories that ran in the Guardian that expose how the network is earning money from oppressive regimes in exchange for creating and airing content that casts a favorable light on the regimes. The stories also revealed CNN International refused to air CNN’s own award-winning documentary,‘iRevolution’, a documentary exposing the Bahrain regime’s brutal crackdown on pro-democracy protesters." If you want to discredit what I referenced from the post, ok. Do it. But what you're trying to do is silly. Its a fact many rregistersd voters didn't vote. Bias source or not. All your bickering about secondhand smoke is way off point. I'm just going to reference whatever I want and if you can prove the point wrong ( like post a reference that says otherwise) then ok.<quoted text>
I was pointing out that your source is about as accurate as asking Hitler "facts" about the Jews. Every bit of information you get from the Heritage Institute comes with a healthy heaping of propaganda and a history of altering research information to match their own agenda. The fact that you posted the exact organization that is responsible for all the misinformation on climate change was just an added bonus. If you have been playing along, you would see that it is a common argument on this thread. The fact that you had no idea about any of this, when using a website funded by oil billionaires, tells me perhaps you should look for more unbiased sources when posting links. I'm sure Glenn Beck also has alot to say about this year's elections but only an idiot would base their reality off of it.
Beside the point though. Don't you think the cnn offense is wprse than an op ed about secondhand smoke? Lol!
Btw if our government didn't know where bin laden was, how did cnn know and get an interview with him.
Bbtw its impossible to reference a source who won't have some kind of bias you're an idiot. http://www.whoownsthenews.com/