Comments by "Harry Mills" (@harrymills2770) on "Andy Warski Jared Holt Audio ft. High School Sexist/homophobic Archive" video.

  1.  Possert74  : ^^This^^ My Dad read everything from Lyndon LaRouche to Robert Welch to The Federalist Papers. I learned, early on, that it's ALWAYS been about what axe you're grinding. And I detected patterns and saw what did and didn't hold up. Maybe the main lesson was that damaging truth usually comes from one's enemies, so to know what the lefties were up to, I read the righties, and vice-versa. From deciding what's news to deciding how to report and opine on the news has always been a partisan endeavor. You're going to report that cat rescue because you love cats, and this one was super cute.
    3
  2. "Activist" journalism is pretty much what the 1st Amendment sought to protect. Saying you represent an activist group or movement doesn't disqualify you. It just lets the listeners know what axe you're grinding, right up front. Black Conservative Patriot starts up every video letting you know his opinion on 2 genders, Christian faith, and if you don't like it, then he just saved you the time you would've wasted finding out, later. I think activist/partisan journalism is the only decent KIND of journalism, and if everybody's up front about their leanings, the pathetic surfers, like me, can take the pulse of a wide spectrum of perspectives, and come up with a closer approximation of the truth than relying on any one of them. And over time, we sickos build up trust in the ones that prove out more consistently. Jimmy Dore's a Progressive version of Ron Paul on foreign policy. Both good sources. But I don't buy any outlet's version until it holds up under all available criticism and facts. This is actually one of the best times in history for news, with more cameras in the hands of citizens than ever before.
    1
  3. RT's The Duran has ucky production values, but will bring you facts and background you're not going to find elsewhere, and Alex Mercouris has a unique take and fact set to offer. I don't always agree with him, and I've seen him be more Russia-phobe than I on some matters and more Russia-phile than I on others. Hard to tell if I'm getting all good stuff, or a mixture, based on the considerable-but-not-unlimited reach of Mercouris's experience, understanding and due diligence. On SOME things, like gas pipelines from Russia to Europe, I just scratch my head. Why are we supporting NATO, and what right do we have to obstruct a pipeline that gives Europe another option for energy? If they get a better deal for energy, that lowers their costs, and makes their products cheaper. That's generally good for the people, everywhere. None of the USA's business. Yes, any use of force to punch that pipeline through sovereign countries, with or without permission, is a bad thing. But if both sides and everybody in between think it's OK, then it ought to be OK, and USA keep its damn nose out of it. I've heard that the Russians don't tell their news and opinion people to push an agenda, although I'm sure that they don't mind too much what those people had to say before they hired them. I'm always a bit reserved about Russia, knowing its history and culture, but I can see it evolving towards many of the noblest and highest aspirations of the American system. Americans only seem to remember the corruption in Russia after the wall came down, and don't realize how the people are grateful to Putin for finally putting a ceiling on the corruption and bringing that ceiling down, with some basic better governance. Americans don't like his ruthlessness, but in many respects, it appears to me that he did what he had to in lesser-of-two-evil situations. But I'm not the scholar and newshound that Mercouris is.
    1