“In any case, you read with exasperation or amusement the multiple errors in a story, and then turn the page to national or international affairs, and read as if the rest of the newspaper was somehow more accurate about Palestine than the baloney you just read. You turn the page, and forget what you know.”

Ironically it was that I knew for a fact that the media had Palestine ass-backwards intentionally and with malice aforethought that was responsible for my beginning to stop trusting them on everything else, which is what begat this two-time Bill Clinton-voter’s change story.

I had not perused the comments on the “The DOJ’s defiance of Congress” blog post until now. As a consequence of that perusal, I repudiate my welcome quoted above. I’m a senior dude at this point, but I’m sometimes naive; shame on me.

See this and this.

“Muh” the supposed conservative with the potty mouth had returned as “Johanson” from the left, talking about how racist the GOP is.

My take is that Muh is a lefty troll writing what “he” considers to be a typical wingnut style. You know, those wingnuts are racist, ignorant, bigoted, XXXX-phobic troglodytes. So I will write a comment to reflect my very correct opinion of wingnuts.

Delete, please. Ban, even.

I am reminded of the commenter bunkerbuster, who exasperated me by misrepresenting what I wrote. I was far from the only exasperated commenter. Neo banned him.

That quote is one by Michael Crichton:

“Briefly stated, the Gell-Mann Amnesia effect is as follows. You open the newspaper to an article on some subject you know well. In Murray’s case, physics. In mine, show business. You read the article and see the journalist has absolutely no understanding of either the facts or the issues. Often, the article is so wrong it actually presents the story backward–reversing cause and effect. I call these the ‘wet streets cause rain’ stories. Paper’s full of them.

“In any case, you read with exasperation or amusement the multiple errors in a story, and then turn the page to national or international affairs, and read as if the rest of the newspaper was somehow more accurate about Palestine than the baloney you just read. You turn the page, and forget what you know.”

https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/65213-briefly-stated-the-gell-mann-amnesia-effect-is-as-follows-you

I remember a “quote” but I can’t find it right now – basically, a person believes what they read in the newspaper until they read something that they know a lot about and the information is wrong. Then, they learn to take everything with a more skeptical view.

There are very few sites that I accept everything they discuss. It is frustrating when the “reporters” cut and paste from other news sites and make assumptions from that reporting. But, when you go to the the source documents, it’s something different. Sometimes, it is hard to get the source document, but when it is something like a law, an executive order, or a recording, then I expect accuracy and neutral terms.

On an item that was very close to me (like about 1/4 mile), there was a shooting at a restaurant last night. It’s been interesting to watch & read the evaluations of the incident, especially since there were men who ran towards the shooter, got their guns from their cars and took action. Note – I haven’t read/heard if the attacker was a legal CCH, but the men who reacted were obeying the rules about “gun free zones”.

But, what was originally reported has changed with time, as the police learn things. Unfortunately, some people will only read part of the first report and make assumptions. And then it continues on, compounding the errors.

And, local knowledge is important. For example, the reports sound like this was the only restaurant in the area. Nope. This happened at a local lake that has a very popular walking/biking trail system and there are four very popular restaurants in the area. Unless you go into the water, there are limited exit areas. That the shooter was in the parking area shooting towards the restaurant does not mean that he was finished with his attack. I fully understand the reaction of the men – there were too many people in the close area that could be hurt if the shooter was able to continue. I appreciate that they were trained and willing to take the risk.

And I thank you deeply for that, esteemed landlord neo.

Muh, I never got to see the deleted comment, and that doesn’t matter. I think I speak for most of us here, when I say we’re interested in your perspective, expressed soberly and intelligently. Go for it!

You’re new here, so perhaps you haven’t yet noticed that I try to keep the comments on a higher level than at most blogs. I am warning you for language in your comment here, and I deleted another comment of yours in another thread.