Quote:
Originally Posted by Morgeruat
Because Ann commenting on insurance allowing aborted fetuses covered by the healthcare bill to get boob jobs, also mandated to be covered by health insurance laws adds to the value or factual nature of the debate? or a swipe at liberals? easily editted out, does not change the facts she references (and she does use a bibliography), the figures, or varying reporting methods of the international community. Feel free to read the originals, nothing factual was removed, only swipes, jabs, and backhanded remarks.
Removing bias simply reverts it from an op-ed piece back to journalism.
|
I read the originals, you see, i've actually come across this article before, thus how I recognised it despite the edits. And seen her discuss the points in debates on TV. I watch Fox, CNN, NBC, BBC.
But no, let's see Ann in all her glory, hating on people, knocking those who don't agree, saying nutty things like "jews should be perfected" or the "9/11 widows are using sympathy to get attention". Let's have all of this nutjob or none at all. If you were fully confident in her points you wouldn't feel the need to omit any part of it. I don't think Ann would be very happy you did so. For the "only swipes, jabs, and backhanded remarks" make Ann who she is.