Does splitting the baby lead to the truth?

1/30/24: Update to 1/10/24 post:

No links for this update. There might have been, but time didn't allow. ( gotta blame it on something!) Anyway, Hillary Clinton was doing her thing talking about "extremists" stealing the election. The Democrats are also playing that game with Ukraine and the border situation in Texas. It's all about "extremism".

Ground News likes to rate stories as factual and not factual. The trouble is that the stories might well be factual. How are such designations determined? The problem seems to be that any on the so-called "right" are exclusively labelled as not factual. This makes me suspcious---very suspicious of Ground News. That's about all I wanted to say on this. I followed another story ( maybe yesterday ) and it was the same old, same old. Ground News said it wasn't factual, but the site had its receipts. How can it not be factual? But there's no links to prove it. There might have been, but there's not.

I suspect this is one of the techniques the political left uses to influence events to their point of view. But those on the center should ask themselves why is it that the left seeks censorship all the time? Are they really that concerned with the facts? A lot of people don't know a lot of things these days. Part of the reason has something to do with censorship. The subjective ratings of sites like Ground News may in itself be just another case of censorship. If you seek the truth, can you really find it with subjective ratings like this? Your reaction to a down rating may well be to not read it. Then you won't have the other side of the story.

end update, the original post follows:

I have written many times about this left-right-center paradigm. It seems to me that the paradigm posits that the truth can be determined through splitting the difference between the extremes. But can you get to the truth like that? Note that the sources for this story are never attributed as factual if they are labeled on the so-called right. Then it is called a "blindspot" because no one on the so-called right covers that story. To the contrary then, the blindspot belongs to Ground News. They cannot attribute anything as factual unless it follows their own biases.







The story of Solomon splitting the baby in order to find the true mother may be considered also. But in this story, Solomon did find the true mother. That's because the baby would be killed if the baby were split into two parts. The true mother would not allow her baby to be killed, so the truth was found without splitting the baby after all. I think this left-right-center paradigm seeks to find the truth by splitting the baby, so to speak. But the truth is not what is being sought, so the "baby" ( meaning the truth) will perish. In other words, no care is being expressed for truth, so they ( meaning Ground News) are not the "mother".