Washington Post. The Washington Times is a garbage propaganda paper that deliberately preys on people who mistake it for the Post.
Its the Transmorphers of news
Washington Post. The Washington Times is a garbage propaganda paper that deliberately preys on people who mistake it for the Post.
See, I was mostly in agreement with this until the two scoops of ice cream part. I think the media is operating at a 10 because Trump is highly corrupt and incompetent and they're rightfully operating at a 10. We're at the point were things that would destroy any other normal presidency are barely registering on the radar because there's just too much scandal with Trump.What's interesting is that Trump, Imo, just pulled the greatest gaff of his presidency in the Helsinki summit, but since the media is already operating at 10 they couldn't turn the knob any higher. They reacted the same way to eating two scoops of ice cream.
LOL!
That's an opinion piece written by a Republican speech writer who worked for George W. Bush, accusing NYT of not properly emphasizing the "horrors of communism" in a history piece on the 20th century.
You think that's evidence of advocating for communism? Holy shit. Did you just google search "new york times communism" and that's all you could get?
Condescension...
Could this have anything to do with people tuning out?
See, I was mostly in agreement with this until the two scoops of ice cream part. I think the media is operating at a 10 because Trump is highly corrupt and incompetent and they're rightfully operating at a 10. We're at the point were things that would destroy any other normal presidency are barely registering on the radar because there's just too much scandal with Trump.
I think the media did a good job covering Helsinki but they got distracted too soon (Playboy model story, smh). But just about everyone worth reading/listening too slammed the president for the disastrous summit.
But wait a second, this is the Washington Post. You just sung their praises two minutes ago. Now you are discrediting Washington Post opinion writers for criticizing New York Times opinion writers? If that is the case, if a 'journalist' at either the New York Times or Washington Post has a clear political slang, they can be discredited as well correct?
The answer is simple:What I find particularly interesting is that, in the face of mainstream media being perceived as untrustworthy, the common response from the "woke" audience is to rush headlong to sources which are likely even less trustworthy than the mainstream media, relying on alternative news sources run by a bunch of opportunistic charlatans.
It's a bit like someone who has lost faith in the medical system to decry "Western medicine" and rush headlong to the ministrations of an unaccredited naturopath who tries to cure malignant tumors with Chinese herbs. Hopefully, in the case of those not trusting mainstream media, they don't end up developing a cancer of narrative - though I fear we may be past that point.
The Washington Post opinion piece you just posted is a valid opinion. I think it's wrong and that the guy is a political hack, but it's not reporting falsifiable claims. It just expresses a far-right guy's opinion that all journalists have to be nationalist political stooges. It does not, however, provide any factual credence to your moronic statement that NYT opinion writers constantly extol the virtues of communism, when that's just a lie.
I cant keep up with you Trump Humpers. You are just like Trump flip flopping daily on if Russia interfered with election. Some days he says yeah, Putin calls him then he says no.
So polls are good now, because it used to be polls were bad.
Do me a favor is there like a website I can go to keep up with the Trump Lickspittles positions, they seem to do a 180 on a daily basis.
I don't think that's always true. Despite differences in values and political views I think there can be common ground for what rises to the level of fair vs unfair criticism. For example, I am very sympathetic to the criticisms of a single payer healthcare system.You and I will naturally disagree as to what is fair criticism, but perhaps we can agree on what is unfair criticism. The two scoops was a joke meant to emphasize the media's obsession with the small things Trump gets wrong. Not every tweet should be treated like the republic is falling, but it is. That is my biggest gripe.
You didn't read the piece, you said "This guy wrote for Bush thus opinion invalid". He cited every NYT piece in question which you also didn't read.
You realize that there us a huge difference between something not ranking a top concern and something being unimportant, right? Like, maybe your long term health isn't your top concern right now, but that doesn't mean you don't care about it.
I don't think that's always true. Despite differences in values and political views I think there can be common ground for what rises to the level of fair vs unfair criticism. For example, I am very sympathetic to the criticisms of a single payer healthcare system.
But yeah, the two scoops stuff is silly but I don't think that's why the media is operating on a 10. I think it's because Trump has a new scandal every week!
BTW, I think the heart of the point you made was a good one. I just think you're downplaying the other stuff.
But what about all the other legitimate scandals and just flat out worrying stuff? Trump University, walking in on naked beauty pageants, profiting from the presidency, several members of his campaign going down for illegal work with Russians (and more to follow), threatening war on Twitter, calling the media "enemies of the people", charities diverting money, I can go on for days. It's as if you're writing off really serious shit as "two scoops of ice cream" and I don't really get why.I am downplaying a lot of it, I believe there are a lot of ice cream controversies masquerading as actual controversies.
I think people were crying foul from day one for trivial reasons and a lot is confirmation bias at this point, not all, but enough of it. I think we should wait for these investigations to conclude before we condemn him as treasonous.
Keep in mind you responded, so you are not tuning out.Keep in mind this is a thread about tuning people out...
Can someone pleeesseee for God's sake explain to me, why it is treated as a top concern pretty much on every lefty platform and why the dnc uses all their energy to drive this train, even though it is considered as "relatively" meaningless?
But what about all the other legitimate scandals and just flat out worrying stuff? Trump University, walking in on naked beauty pageants, profiting from the presidency, several members of his campaign going down for illegal work with Russians (and more to follow), threatening war on Twitter, calling the media "enemies of the people", charities diverting money, I can go on for days. It's as if you're writing off really serious shit as "two scoops of ice cream" and I don't really get why.
Well, I don't know what you read/watch, but I think it's not reported fairly either (they should be much harsher!).Even that which I disagree with is not reported fairly. Show me the man and I'll show you the crime. Trump is the real life example of a cop following someone for 500 miles keeping track of traffic violations. I definitely saw him run a couple stop signs, but when the media treats not signaling like reckless driving I start taking things with a grain of salt.