Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Welcome to Perspectives. We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
Newt Gingrich: Seven questions for the New York Times; A "must read" for all liberals
Topic Started: Nov 16 2016, 10:25 AM (1,319 Views)
dcbl
Member Avatar
Good guys wear white hats
Adolph Hipster
Nov 16 2016, 12:10 PM
W A Mozart
Nov 16 2016, 10:26 AM
This is good...!


Here are the seven questions:

Quote:
 
1. Does the Times have any reporters, editors, or columnists who will say they voted for Trump, and has it hired any new ones?



2. Has it hired any reporters who are even Republicans?



3. Has it changed its policies that allowed journalists to express their opinions about the events and people they covered in their news stories?



4. Will it ask the Pulitzer Prize board to withdraw, and its reporters to return, any prizes that might be awarded for news stories that contained reporters’ personal opinions?



5. Have its editors retracted misleading news headlines that expressed opinions or pure speculation--such as the paper’s coverage of Trump’s tax returns?



6. Has it fired reporters who admitted to writing politically motivated “news” stories and encouraged interview subjects to talk to them so they could stop Trump?



7. Has it retracted its shameful election-eve front-page story “reporting” on Trump’s innermost thoughts and feelings, virtually every sentence of which is filled with reporters’ opinions and speculations--featuring claims like “he is struggling to suppress his bottomless need for attention”?

If the answer to all of these questions is “no”--why would anyone believe that the paper is now “rededicated” to honesty? And why would anyone trust the New York Times to report on American politics?


Mozart
The same questions back to brietbart, flipping the script
so you are saying that Breitbart & NYT are in the same category insofar as newsworthiness?

great point, I agree
Republicans sign checks on the front, democrats sign them on the back…True story!
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
coverpoint

W A Mozart
Nov 16 2016, 02:38 PM
coverpoint
Nov 16 2016, 01:59 PM
When a major political party is led by a racist, it is the media’s duty to expose that racism to the American public.
How very silly of you.

You forgot to mention that he was a Nazi too, wears swastika's on his arms when not seen in public ...and is a contributing member of the KKK as well. No question. Trust me. He also hates puppies, wears leather marching boots whenever he can and sleeps under a portrait of Joseph Goebbels. Trust me.


Mozart
:lol: Of course President Pussygrabber is a racist. The fact that you are unable (or unwilling) to recognize that doesn't make it untrue.

You may want to get used to it. It will undoubtedly be part of the American political dialogue for the next 4 years.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Robert Stout
Member Avatar

George Aligator
Nov 16 2016, 12:24 PM
peewee
Nov 16 2016, 11:58 AM
George Aligator
Nov 16 2016, 10:40 AM
One is amused to see fans of Breitbart News and Fox News calling for fair and balanced by the most influential and avowedly liberal newspaper in the country.

There is confusion here about "the media," which, as the term implies, suggests that the different sources of news and information share common roots and responsibilities. They don't.

The press (newspapers) have always been politically partisan; in fact, many of them used to be owned by political parties. Partisan support and attack have been the foundation of editorial policy since the days of Jim and Benny Franklin. Look it up if you don't believe me.

Radio and TV do not have their roots in "the press." From the beginning, these media have been seen as commercial users of the publicly-owned airwaves, rather as trucking companies use the public highways. This difference has meant much more stringent censorship of content, including advertising, and government licensing dependent on meeting standards of fairness and the public interest which have never applied to the press.

As usual, the American public, ignorant of its laws and history, is whining and griping about a situation which, although deplorable, is not what it thinks it is. The right is, as usual, screaming over the wrong thing.
The NYT evolved into an every day version of the National Enquirer. Gossip, crap, and unmitigated bias printed garbage.
One is tempted to ask little Peewee the question that dumbfounded Mrs. Palin, "what papers do you read every day?"
Peewee can't see well nowadays, so he listens to Coyote Network News every day...They have a higher journalism standard than the NY Times.......... :victory:
Jesus can raise the dead, but he can't fix stupid
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
jake58

coverpoint
Nov 16 2016, 02:55 PM
W A Mozart
Nov 16 2016, 02:38 PM
coverpoint
Nov 16 2016, 01:59 PM
When a major political party is led by a racist, it is the media’s duty to expose that racism to the American public.
How very silly of you.

You forgot to mention that he was a Nazi too, wears swastika's on his arms when not seen in public ...and is a contributing member of the KKK as well. No question. Trust me. He also hates puppies, wears leather marching boots whenever he can and sleeps under a portrait of Joseph Goebbels. Trust me.


Mozart
:lol: Of course President Pussygrabber is a racist. The fact that you are unable (or unwilling) to recognize that doesn't make it untrue.

You may want to get used to it. It will undoubtedly be part of the American political dialogue for the next 4 years.
I thought CT's meltdowns were going to be fun, but yours are looking like they'll be epic.

If all you've got is the race card, you know - the strategy that didn't work this time, you might as well put it back in your pants. You got nothing and are destined to wander in the wilderness for a while. Talk to c2c, that's all he has too.
That which can be asserted without evidence; can be dismissed without evidence- Christopher Hitchens
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
W A Mozart
Member Avatar

W A Mozart
Nov 16 2016, 02:38 PM
coverpoint
Nov 16 2016, 01:59 PM
When a major political party is led by a racist, it is the media’s duty to expose that racism to the American public.
How very silly of you.

You forgot to mention that he was a Nazi too, wears swastika's on his arms when not seen in public ...and is a contributing member of the KKK as well. No question. Trust me. He also hates puppies, wears leather marching boots whenever he can and sleeps under a portrait of Joseph Goebbels. Trust me.


Mozart
Er, I forgot to mention one post script (ps) to the above...

Trust me....(because)

I read all about it in the, ....New York Times....!


:)


Mozart
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
peewee

George Aligator
Nov 16 2016, 12:24 PM
peewee
Nov 16 2016, 11:58 AM
George Aligator
Nov 16 2016, 10:40 AM
One is amused to see fans of Breitbart News and Fox News calling for fair and balanced by the most influential and avowedly liberal newspaper in the country.

There is confusion here about "the media," which, as the term implies, suggests that the different sources of news and information share common roots and responsibilities. They don't.

The press (newspapers) have always been politically partisan; in fact, many of them used to be owned by political parties. Partisan support and attack have been the foundation of editorial policy since the days of Jim and Benny Franklin. Look it up if you don't believe me.

Radio and TV do not have their roots in "the press." From the beginning, these media have been seen as commercial users of the publicly-owned airwaves, rather as trucking companies use the public highways. This difference has meant much more stringent censorship of content, including advertising, and government licensing dependent on meeting standards of fairness and the public interest which have never applied to the press.

As usual, the American public, ignorant of its laws and history, is whining and griping about a situation which, although deplorable, is not what it thinks it is. The right is, as usual, screaming over the wrong thing.
The NYT evolved into an every day version of the National Enquirer. Gossip, crap, and unmitigated bias printed garbage.
One is tempted to ask little Peewee the question that dumbfounded Mrs. Palin, "what papers do you read every day?"
Zero newspapers. Who would have time to read a newspaper? A retired, a homeless, a housewife, a stay at home dad, unemployed...productive people have no time to read a newspaper is my point.
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
peewee

coverpoint
Nov 16 2016, 02:55 PM
W A Mozart
Nov 16 2016, 02:38 PM
coverpoint
Nov 16 2016, 01:59 PM
When a major political party is led by a racist, it is the media’s duty to expose that racism to the American public.
How very silly of you.

You forgot to mention that he was a Nazi too, wears swastika's on his arms when not seen in public ...and is a contributing member of the KKK as well. No question. Trust me. He also hates puppies, wears leather marching boots whenever he can and sleeps under a portrait of Joseph Goebbels. Trust me.


Mozart
:lol: Of course President Pussygrabber is a racist. The fact that you are unable (or unwilling) to recognize that doesn't make it untrue.

You may want to get used to it. It will undoubtedly be part of the American political dialogue for the next 4 years.
I've heard nothing racial from Trump. What examples do you have?
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
peewee

Robert Stout
Nov 16 2016, 04:17 PM
George Aligator
Nov 16 2016, 12:24 PM
peewee
Nov 16 2016, 11:58 AM
George Aligator
Nov 16 2016, 10:40 AM
One is amused to see fans of Breitbart News and Fox News calling for fair and balanced by the most influential and avowedly liberal newspaper in the country.

There is confusion here about "the media," which, as the term implies, suggests that the different sources of news and information share common roots and responsibilities. They don't.

The press (newspapers) have always been politically partisan; in fact, many of them used to be owned by political parties. Partisan support and attack have been the foundation of editorial policy since the days of Jim and Benny Franklin. Look it up if you don't believe me.

Radio and TV do not have their roots in "the press." From the beginning, these media have been seen as commercial users of the publicly-owned airwaves, rather as trucking companies use the public highways. This difference has meant much more stringent censorship of content, including advertising, and government licensing dependent on meeting standards of fairness and the public interest which have never applied to the press.

As usual, the American public, ignorant of its laws and history, is whining and griping about a situation which, although deplorable, is not what it thinks it is. The right is, as usual, screaming over the wrong thing.
The NYT evolved into an every day version of the National Enquirer. Gossip, crap, and unmitigated bias printed garbage.
One is tempted to ask little Peewee the question that dumbfounded Mrs. Palin, "what papers do you read every day?"
Peewee can't see well nowadays, so he listens to Coyote Network News every day...They have a higher journalism standard than the NY Times.......... :victory:
Only Fox. CNN and MSNBsC are laden with BS. The RT is ok as well.
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Robert Stout
Member Avatar

peewee
Nov 17 2016, 12:42 AM
George Aligator
Nov 16 2016, 12:24 PM
peewee
Nov 16 2016, 11:58 AM
George Aligator
Nov 16 2016, 10:40 AM
One is amused to see fans of Breitbart News and Fox News calling for fair and balanced by the most influential and avowedly liberal newspaper in the country.

There is confusion here about "the media," which, as the term implies, suggests that the different sources of news and information share common roots and responsibilities. They don't.

The press (newspapers) have always been politically partisan; in fact, many of them used to be owned by political parties. Partisan support and attack have been the foundation of editorial policy since the days of Jim and Benny Franklin. Look it up if you don't believe me.

Radio and TV do not have their roots in "the press." From the beginning, these media have been seen as commercial users of the publicly-owned airwaves, rather as trucking companies use the public highways. This difference has meant much more stringent censorship of content, including advertising, and government licensing dependent on meeting standards of fairness and the public interest which have never applied to the press.

As usual, the American public, ignorant of its laws and history, is whining and griping about a situation which, although deplorable, is not what it thinks it is. The right is, as usual, screaming over the wrong thing.
The NYT evolved into an every day version of the National Enquirer. Gossip, crap, and unmitigated bias printed garbage.
One is tempted to ask little Peewee the question that dumbfounded Mrs. Palin, "what papers do you read every day?"
Zero newspapers. Who would have time to read a newspaper? A retired, a homeless, a housewife, a stay at home dad, unemployed...productive people have no time to read a newspaper is my point.
Aligator believes he is at the cutting edge of liberal thought, reading the NY Times by the fireside and plotting a Marxist revolution in northern New Hampshire....You can't expect much more from the elderly................. :dunno:
Jesus can raise the dead, but he can't fix stupid
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
coverpoint

jake58
Nov 16 2016, 04:44 PM
coverpoint
Nov 16 2016, 02:55 PM
W A Mozart
Nov 16 2016, 02:38 PM
coverpoint
Nov 16 2016, 01:59 PM
When a major political party is led by a racist, it is the media’s duty to expose that racism to the American public.
How very silly of you.

You forgot to mention that he was a Nazi too, wears swastika's on his arms when not seen in public ...and is a contributing member of the KKK as well. No question. Trust me. He also hates puppies, wears leather marching boots whenever he can and sleeps under a portrait of Joseph Goebbels. Trust me.


Mozart
:lol: Of course President Pussygrabber is a racist. The fact that you are unable (or unwilling) to recognize that doesn't make it untrue.

You may want to get used to it. It will undoubtedly be part of the American political dialogue for the next 4 years.
I thought CT's meltdowns were going to be fun, but yours are looking like they'll be epic.

If all you've got is the race card, you know - the strategy that didn't work this time, you might as well put it back in your pants. You got nothing and are destined to wander in the wilderness for a while. Talk to c2c, that's all he has too.
I think you will find that it was President-elect Pussygrabber that raised the "race card" in his announcement for president and has repeatedly raised the "race card" ever since.

You are mistaken. The "race card" was the most effective strategy that President-elect Pussygrabber used to win conservative votes. I see no reason for him to stop now. It appears that he is interested in adding some of his fellow racists to his cabinet and advisory staff.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
W A Mozart
Member Avatar

So, here's the good part.

The New York Times is going to be under immense financial pressure over the next few years. They've been losing money hand-over-fist for the past 12 years or so, and now they're gonna be put under the microscope as to what kind of news organization do we have here. One dedicated to electing nothing but Democrats? Liberals? No one else counts? No other ideas, particularly conservative, are welcome?

Now, the other great LIBERAL rag in New York is the Daily News. These people threw everything out there, including the kitchen sink, to stop a Trump Presidency. They didn't even feign neutrality in the matter, just out-and-out hatred. Nothing was too dirty for these guys:

Posted Image

One problem, however, that they share with the New York Times is revenue, ...money. They're essentially broke.

http://nypost.com/2016/11/16/daily-news-reports-steep-decline-in-circulation/

So, what does it all mean? People are just tired of the bull sh@t. Slanting the news, or advocacy journalism, has become the 'norm' in our society. Yup, FOX News does it too. But FOX is a reaction to what CNN, ABC, NBC, CBS and on and on, have been doing for years. Viewers tune-in FOX because they KNOW they will get a 'conservative' slant to the news. Everyone knows it. Fine. People are now savvy to the slanting of news, no matter which news organization is doing it. It's over. People get it. The major news outlets, however, do NOT get it. They still operate like they're actually fair and balanced. Right. Sure.... The fact that the New York Times has NOT one Republican on its staff, where 50% of the voting population choose that party all over the country, is a clear indication of the nonsense/duplicity taking place at so-called news media outlets. Not one, really. Incredible. It's really insane if you stop and think about it. It's why the Nazi party had overwhelmed the population of Germany during the 1930's. They controlled ideas and topics of discussion, little different than what the New York Times does today. Spin the story to our liking. We're right, you're wrong, the rest of you can go suck eggs.


Mozart
Edited by W A Mozart, Nov 17 2016, 01:01 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
W A Mozart
Member Avatar

Furthermore,

Watch how the BBC handled the Trump election via their correspondent in Berlin. Good stuff.

Quote:
 
A few hours after US President-elect Donald Trump took to the stage to make his acceptance speech, as evening fell in Berlin, small candles were quietly lit and carefully placed in front of aged, stone doorsteps and along the darkening pavements.
Berliners were marking the anniversary of Kristallnacht (when Jewish people and their businesses were violently attacked in 1938).
It was barely noted amid the febrile howl of international reaction to the US election. Neither was the 27th anniversary of the fall of the Berlin Wall, which shares the same date.
But both events - and all that they represent of this country's past - explain, partially at least, why Germans were so repulsed by Donald Trump's election rhetoric and why so few (4% by one poll's reckoning) wanted him in the White House.
http://www.bbc.com/news/election-us-2016-37936207


Wow. Didja know that "Kristallnacht" is the same date as the US elections, and the election of one Donald Trump? Wow. Who'd a thought? Can you hear the jackboots? Can you hear them playing "Alte Kameraden" again (see below) Never mind that the Trump election was "welcomed" by the equally conservative Netanyahu. Never mind that Trump's son-in-law is Jewish. What they're really doing is "equating" the deportation of illegal immigrants with Kristallnacht. Same thing. Spin the story to your liking, your point of view.


They're marching again....!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dmIWnEnrQrI


Mozart
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
StillCrazy1
Member Avatar
!!!!
peewee
Nov 17 2016, 12:42 AM
George Aligator
Nov 16 2016, 12:24 PM
peewee
Nov 16 2016, 11:58 AM
George Aligator
Nov 16 2016, 10:40 AM
One is amused to see fans of Breitbart News and Fox News calling for fair and balanced by the most influential and avowedly liberal newspaper in the country.

There is confusion here about "the media," which, as the term implies, suggests that the different sources of news and information share common roots and responsibilities. They don't.

The press (newspapers) have always been politically partisan; in fact, many of them used to be owned by political parties. Partisan support and attack have been the foundation of editorial policy since the days of Jim and Benny Franklin. Look it up if you don't believe me.

Radio and TV do not have their roots in "the press." From the beginning, these media have been seen as commercial users of the publicly-owned airwaves, rather as trucking companies use the public highways. This difference has meant much more stringent censorship of content, including advertising, and government licensing dependent on meeting standards of fairness and the public interest which have never applied to the press.

As usual, the American public, ignorant of its laws and history, is whining and griping about a situation which, although deplorable, is not what it thinks it is. The right is, as usual, screaming over the wrong thing.
The NYT evolved into an every day version of the National Enquirer. Gossip, crap, and unmitigated bias printed garbage.
One is tempted to ask little Peewee the question that dumbfounded Mrs. Palin, "what papers do you read every day?"
Zero newspapers. Who would have time to read a newspaper? A retired, a homeless, a housewife, a stay at home dad, unemployed...productive people have no time to read a newspaper is my point.
Sorry but retired people are not unproductive people. In fact if they have enough money to be retired they are probably far from unproductive.
Ever notice the only 2 people Trump refuses to speak ill of are Stormy Daniels and Vladimir Putin?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
George Aligator
Member Avatar

The Leader signals an attack on The New York Times and thousands of his followers, most of whom have never read the NTY in their lives, respond with howls of indignation, finding a new outlet for the left-behind rage that boils within them and with no idea what they are talking about.

There is a long-standing hostility on the rural right wing of "them what has read a book." Trump is resurrecting it for tactical advantage along with its companion prejudices. It's an old trick and it has its uses, but it also has its limitations. The people who elected Trump love this stuff. The people who run the country don't.
Conservatism is a social disease
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Robert Stout
Member Avatar

George Aligator
Nov 17 2016, 08:32 PM
The Leader signals an attack on The New York Times and thousands of his followers, most of whom have never read the NTY in their lives, respond with howls of indignation, finding a new outlet for the left-behind rage that boils within them and with no idea what they are talking about.

There is a long-standing hostility on the rural right wing of "them what has read a book." Trump is resurrecting it for tactical advantage along with its companion prejudices. It's an old trick and it has its uses, but it also has its limitations. The people who elected Trump love this stuff. The people who run the country don't.


Our rage is not so much against the NY Times as is against obscene hotel room rates in NYC...It was better when you only got mugged in NYC......... :dunno:
Jesus can raise the dead, but he can't fix stupid
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
peewee

StillCrazy1
Nov 17 2016, 08:25 PM
peewee
Nov 17 2016, 12:42 AM
George Aligator
Nov 16 2016, 12:24 PM
peewee
Nov 16 2016, 11:58 AM
George Aligator
Nov 16 2016, 10:40 AM
One is amused to see fans of Breitbart News and Fox News calling for fair and balanced by the most influential and avowedly liberal newspaper in the country.

There is confusion here about "the media," which, as the term implies, suggests that the different sources of news and information share common roots and responsibilities. They don't.

The press (newspapers) have always been politically partisan; in fact, many of them used to be owned by political parties. Partisan support and attack have been the foundation of editorial policy since the days of Jim and Benny Franklin. Look it up if you don't believe me.

Radio and TV do not have their roots in "the press." From the beginning, these media have been seen as commercial users of the publicly-owned airwaves, rather as trucking companies use the public highways. This difference has meant much more stringent censorship of content, including advertising, and government licensing dependent on meeting standards of fairness and the public interest which have never applied to the press.

As usual, the American public, ignorant of its laws and history, is whining and griping about a situation which, although deplorable, is not what it thinks it is. The right is, as usual, screaming over the wrong thing.
The NYT evolved into an every day version of the National Enquirer. Gossip, crap, and unmitigated bias printed garbage.
One is tempted to ask little Peewee the question that dumbfounded Mrs. Palin, "what papers do you read every day?"
Zero newspapers. Who would have time to read a newspaper? A retired, a homeless, a housewife, a stay at home dad, unemployed...productive people have no time to read a newspaper is my point.
Sorry but retired people are not unproductive people. In fact if they have enough money to be retired they are probably far from unproductive.
If they are doing nothing then they are not productive. Many have no retirement savings and are living in Section 8 housing, working at McDonalds, and are far removed from the unicorn and butterfly existence that you envision.
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
W A Mozart
Member Avatar

George Aligator
Nov 17 2016, 08:32 PM
The Leader signals an attack on The New York Times and thousands of his followers, most of whom have never read the NTY in their lives, respond with howls of indignation, finding a new outlet for the left-behind rage that boils within them and with no idea what they are talking about.

There is a long-standing hostility on the rural right wing of "them what has read a book." Trump is resurrecting it for tactical advantage along with its companion prejudices. It's an old trick and it has its uses, but it also has its limitations. The people who elected Trump love this stuff. The people who run the country don't.
Well, being a fellow member of the fraternity of the "great unwashed," might I suggest to you and your fellow totalitarreans that you are little different in the defense presented to the outside world as to the then attacks on 'Pravda' and the 'Voelkische Beobachter' by one Vladimir Ulyanov and similarly Dr. Joseph Goebbels? Same defense! "Biased? Us? These people can barely read...! (them what has read a book) We don't need any political give and take; we are above all of that. We give them direction."

It is incredible to read Georgie DEFENDING the New York Times, which is CLEARLY a one-party newspaper, no different than Pravda or the Voelkische Beobachter. We're right, you're wrong. Hadn't we learned THAT lesson in the 20th century when newspapers and mass communication outlets only presented the thoughts and ideas of the ruling party? Isn't that, like, ...bad? People died by the millions. Half of Leningrad and Moscow disappeared into the gulag with no notice in Pravda or Izvestia. None. Just disappeared. The Voelkische Beobachter never reported the building of Auschwitz or Treblinka or Sobibor. Georgie would defend this the same way he defends the New York Times today, ...there is No need for alternative viewpoints (or Jewish viewpoints) because we've got you covered! We know best. Trust us.


Georgie's man at the New York Times...

Posted Image


Mozart
Edited by W A Mozart, Nov 18 2016, 09:26 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
George Aligator
Member Avatar

It is incredible to read Georgie DEFENDING the New York Times, which is CLEARLY a one-party newspaper, no different than Pravda or the Voelkische Beobachter.
Here is an example of the garbled logic and political hysteria that has infected our political discourse and distorted the thinking of even an intelligent and educated guy like Mozart.

Almost every paper published is a "one-party newspaper". Editorial boards exist to create a coherent set of political policies and endorsements, with very rare exceptions, endorsements are made of parties as well as individual candidates. This has been true for centuries. It is a basic fact about how newspapers operate.

Ignorance of the facts about editorial policy is one thing; illogical manipulation of that ignorance is more dishonest and more sinister. The commonality of editorial structure does not mean that editorial content is the same in different papers. Pravda and The New York Times are both "one-party" newspapers, but so are L'Osservatore Romano and The Chicago Tribune. Mozart's statement isn't an argument, it is a propaganda trick, part of the "fake news" approach that has polluted the exchange of ideas essential to American democracy. Mozart knows far better than to flout this stuff. He should be ashamed of himself.
Conservatism is a social disease
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
W A Mozart
Member Avatar

And here is an excellent interview (conducted yesterday) with Nicholas Kristof a flaming left-wing Commie... ;) ...and Tucker Carlson about the New York Times. Over the years Kristof has been a particularly repugnant sort of Liberal, condescending and pompous, and ;) writes the "editorials" for the New York Times. What an a$$.

http://video.foxnews.com/v/5215134658001/?#sp=show-clips

Notice when he says that we shouldn't be living "in bubbles?" ... :rotflmao:
Dude, the ENTIRE New York Times is one gigantic LIBERAL bubble...!


Mozart
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
W A Mozart
Member Avatar

George Aligator
Nov 18 2016, 09:50 AM
It is incredible to read Georgie DEFENDING the New York Times, which is CLEARLY a one-party newspaper, no different than Pravda or the Voelkische Beobachter.
Here is an example of the garbled logic and political hysteria that has infected our political discourse and distorted the thinking of even an intelligent and educated guy like Mozart.

Almost every paper published is a "one-party newspaper". Editorial boards exist to create a coherent set of political policies and endorsements, with very rare exceptions, endorsements are made of parties as well as individual candidates. This has been true for centuries. It is a basic fact about how newspapers operate.

Ignorance of the facts about editorial policy is one thing; illogical manipulation of that ignorance is more dishonest and more sinister. The commonality of editorial structure does not mean that editorial content is the same in different papers. Pravda and The New York Times are both "one-party" newspapers, but so are L'Osservatore Romano and The Chicago Tribune. Mozart's statement isn't an argument, it is a propaganda trick, part of the "fake news" approach that has polluted the exchange of ideas essential to American democracy. Mozart knows far better than to flout this stuff. He should be ashamed of himself.
So, then, we both agree!

So, OK. Here's the plan. I'll call that weirdo Sulzberger and request (from the both of us) that the masthead from the New York Times, which states "the paper of record," be replaced with "Voice of the Democratic Party!"

Okey dokey?

:cheers:


Mozart
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
Create a free forum in seconds.
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · UnitedStates.com DOMESTIC U.S. news · Next Topic »
Add Reply