FWIW (certainly better to do this than not IMO) they changed their headline between the 1st and 2nd print edition. pic.twitter.com/DOSAMFbvq0— Nate Silver (@NateSilver538) August 6, 2019
ADDED: I'm not sure I understand the headline "Trump Urges Unity vs. Racism." I see 2 interpretations.
One would be clearly expressed if the "vs." were translated into English and written as the word "against." (Many judges and law professors say the names of cases with the "v." changed to the word "against.") If it's "Trump Urges Unity Against Racism," then Trump's idea is that we should unite to oppose racism. That's respectful and supportive toward Trump.
But because I expect hostility toward Trump, I'm not sure the headline doesn't mean that Trump is urging 2 ideas — unity and racism — and these ideas are in conflict with each other.
To use parenthesis as in a math equation: Trump Urges (Unity vs. Racism).
That is, unity is in an endless struggle with racism, and Trump pushes this struggle upon us, and he's a big troublemaker, jerking us around by rooting for unity some of the time and at other times rooting for racism.
BUT: I don't want to be confusing about what Nate Silver is highlighting, which is the editorial opinion shoehorned into a news headline. What Trump talked about is the news and that's what the headline should say. There's an infinite number of things that Trump didn't talk about, and headlines shouldn't report what didn't happen. The choice to put one thing that didn't happen in a headline — embracing gun control — turns it from news into opinion. The necessary implication is that he ought to have embraced gun control.
CORRECTION: When I wrote all of the above, I believed that "Trump Urges Unity vs. Racism" was the second headline! Silver thinks "Assailing Hate But Not Guns" is an improvement. Well, it's more clearly written. That is true.
ALSO: I saw on Twitter that #CancelNYT was trending. It was a reaction to the first headline, "Trump Urges Unity vs. Racism." And the NYT apparently changed the headline to appease people who expected a better demonstration of hostility toward Trump.
The collective #CancelNYT response to this headline is rather revealing. Extremes of the party paradigms only support #FreePress so long as its a pseudo PR arm of their political ideology
— Gracie Nunyabiz @RNRTennessee (@GracieNunyabiz) August 6, 2019
The monster you feed, is the monster that will consume you.
Take note if #journalismmatters pic.twitter.com/hiIgZQ1e8I
पोस्ट्स
१२१ टिप्पण्या:
Didn’t fit the Narrative.
There's no BIAS in the media.....NOOOO, it's all in your heads. (by the way..there are white supremacists and racists hiding under your bed....BOO!!)
So, now NYT headlines are written by Twitter critics. Interesting.
You seem to understand it well which is why NYT changed the headline to avoid any possibility of readers thinking NYT supports Trump.
Liberals: for addressing root causes, unless they're not.
The other issue is what motivated Nate to call attention to the error. Most likely to help NYT avoid any perception of Trump-like by it's readers. See? They fixed it!
The real reason I believe it was changed is that the first put Trump in a positive light.
What were the odds the headline would be changed?
The original headline was a contradiction in terms
Trump Urges Unity vs. Racism?
Let's Review
Trump == Racism
so,
Racism Urges Unity vs. Racism? That makes no sense!
how about:
Trump Urge Unity vs. Trump? This postulates that Trump could be against himself; impossible! Trump is BAD!
What unity can be expected when half the country has now been branded as racist white supremacist supporters?
How is unity even defined under the new intersectionalist rulebook?
Because I'm thinking unity has been redefined to mean the Morlocks go back to knowing their place under the Eloi.
I am Laslo.
It’s pretty clear that the left wants gun confiscation for the same reason Nazis confiscated guns from Jews in the 1930s.
OT Nate that exposes his cluelessness: I'm not sure why prices on Trump re-election at betting markets (and I think this is matched by the conventional wisdom writ large) have shifted strongly in his favor over the past few months when the fundamentals don't seem to have changed much.
Did he watch the Democratic debates?
"...editorial opinion shoehorned into a news headline..." Day ending in a 'Y.'
“headlines shouldn't report what didn't happen.”
Mueller didn’t exonerate Trump.
which is the editorial opinion shoehorned into a news headline
they wouldn't have had these problems in the olden days, before Trump made them announce (on the front page!) that, because of Trump; there would no longer be Any differentiation between News, and Opinion
Also, Trump Urges Unity sounds like he's asking All Americans to believe the Same Things, to DO the Same Things... This is (to the progs at the NYTs) a definition of Racism!!!
Trump did call for gun control measures, of course, so the new headline is simply false.
The Washington Post headline likewise says Trump assails bigotry not guns, so presumably the NYT saw that and decided it was a safer headline to present to its readers, inaccuracy notwithstanding. Or they just colluded.
which is the editorial opinion shoehorned into a news headline
Remember the quaint old days when broad based leftie media bias was considered a crazy conspiracy theory?
...but some progress is being made: Blogger didn't grammar correct the use of leftie in the previous sentence.
Maybe they did it because of all the lefties CRYING....https://twitchy.com/dougp-3137/2019/08/05/uh-oh-ny-times-tuesday-front-page-hl-about-trumps-address-to-nation-sends-resistance-brigade-over-the-edge/
The first headline, albeit mischievous, is honest and clear in its expression of Trump-hate.
It’s the second headline, passively voicing the idea that President Trump is The Violent Assailant, that is pernicious, subversive and malicious.
Trump said, "In one voice, our nation must condemn racism, bigotry, and white supremacy." I think it's fair to characterize that as "Trump urges unity to condemn racism." But presumably that headline is too long, as apparently would be "Trump urges unity against racism."
I agree with commenter Matt Slaban that the headline was changed because it was insufficiently OMB. I agree with Althouse that the new headline is stretching to be OMB. Why not "Assailing hate but not Greenhouse Gas Emissions," or "Assailing Hate but not income inequality."
But, (AA) I don't want to be confusing about what Nate Silver is highlighting, which is the editorial opinion shoehorned into a news headline." Nate Silver is highlighting and applauding .
The left's incessant bigotry ranting seems like a lost strategy to me.
In our every day lives, as we go about our business, we all observe that this great crisis of bigotry doesn't exist.
It only exists in the mists of internet yakking.
Because I'm thinking unity has been redefined to mean the Morlocks go back to knowing their place under the Eloi.
Great analogy, Laslo. Better than the Ugandan tribes analogy I generally think of.
Another possible interpretation of "Trump Urges Unity vs. Racism" is, there has been a change in what Trumps urges. He now urges unity as opposed to his usual encouragement of racism.
When it comes to NYT supporting trump bashing or factual accuracy, Trump bashing is going to win every time.
It's their business model.
Sorry, make that Rwanda.
The greatest sin is media bias, not racism and sexism inspired slaughter. Ann once again provides a safe space for deplorable snowflakes
Quick perusal of Twitter shows that Sablan is right. They were mad because the headline implied Trump wasn't a racist. People need help.
In the original Planet of the Apes series the gorillas were the Bad Guys: militaristic and perceived as deplorable.
The chimpanzees were intelligent, pacifistic, and pretty much intersectionalist: you know, the Good Guys.
Except the chimpanzees helped Charlton Heston live, when the Gorillas saw him as a threat and wanted to kill him.
Then, at the end of Beneath the Planet of the Apes, the wounded Heston blows up the entire fucking world, chimpanzees included.
Sometimes the chimps get it wrong.
I am Laslo.
The MSM has made all these terms, racism, white supremacy, nationalist, etc., meaningless.
Such things do exist, but this screeching is just all about one thing: votes for the next election.
The greatest sin is media bias, not racism and sexism inspired slaughter. Ann once again provides a safe space for deplorable snowflakes.
That gave you a nice dopamine hit, Howard? Feel better now?
Be sure to come back when you need another hit.
Sounds like you got off on it too, Thomas. Creepy
That's a nice strategy, Howard.
My choices are to stick the needle in your arm again or let you have the last word.
I heard some pol interviewed yesterday and claimed President Trump was against gun regulations. Used the idea that he was in favor, then the NRA changed his mind.
What legislation has President Trump vetoed?
The pols of all stripes are despicable. They refuse to do their job, and media is playing along.
Congress hides behind bureaucracy righting the rules for the laws they do pass. If voters complain, the responsibility is pushed to the unelected, unaccountable bureaucrat. Legislation that is controversial? Can't write it, can't vote on it, because the President murmured once he was adverse to the notion. Not promised to veto. So legislators pretend they would do "something" but for the veto.
The only legislation that gets debated are sure things. All our politicians are worthless.
Fourth, we must make sure that those judged to pose a grave risk to public safety do not have access to firearms, and that, if they do, those firearms can be taken through rapid due process. That is why I have called for red flag laws, also known as extreme risk protection orders.
...
Republicans and Democrats have proven that we can join together in a bipartisan fashion to address this plague. Last year, we enacted the STOP School Violence and Fix NICS Acts into law, providing grants to improve school safety and strengthening critical background checks for firearm purchases. At my direction, the Department of Justice banned bump stocks. Last year, we prosecuted a record number of firearms offenses. But there is so much more that we have to do.
The new headline isn't just pandering, it's a bald-faced lie.
Sometimes one is tempted to have a discussion with Howard. For instance one could point out that without a clear eyed and realistic view of the situation, it is all but impossible to come up with an optimal solution and media bias prevents that, but then I know that Howard is just throwing out shit.
The Slimes snowflake readers couldn't handle anything that might remotely suggest Trump is presidential. The Slimes is a left-wing viewspaper written for left-wing loons. It ceased being a serious publication decades ago
Why is Nate Silver considered so important?
I suppose one could implement some sort of statistical process control algorithm to all of our devices that watch us every minute, maintains our social credit rating, and set the bounds of human behavior to increase our “safety.” Kind of like Snopes is trying to set the boundaries of satire. There is a significant plurality of voters who don’t give a flying fuck about freedom and think that there is such a thing as perfect safety. Wherever they get control, human misery mulitplies and they have to build walls to prevent escapes, Berlin, or set up snipers to prevent escapes, Cuba.
But I wouldn’t worry about abuse because it will be different this time, we promise.
“Why is Nate Silver considered so important?”
He brings the credibility he earned in baseball and sells it out pandering to liberals. He is good at math, bad at the underlying assumptions, which makes him a perfect mouthpiece for the liberals because he remains so earnest, not understanding his own blind spots.
The obvious solution is to switch from a “What is not explicitly forbidden is allowed” society to a “what is not explicitly allowed is forbidden,” society where prosecutors make the laws as needed when a crime is required.
A distinction must be made between conscious and unconscious bias. The Times has both in droves. So why make this distinction? Because unconscious bias is merely bias but conscious is propaganda. This headline reveals the conscious bias at work, adjusting to the hive’s demands. In a way, conscious bias is better because it forces the journalists to admit to themselves that they are cogs in a propaganda machine. At some place deep in their dark, withered hearts, this must pain them. And that gives me some joy.
AAT: Exactly. I'm just reflecting your shit back to you people.
I admit to trolling and admit to flirting with Althouse into banning me. Just a spot of fun
We’re lucky we can trust the headlines all those other times!
Blogger Howard said...
Sounds like you got off on it too, Thomas. Creepy
Speaking of creepy.
The people behind the "white supremacy" theme are the same ones that pushed The Russia Hoax.
So, now NYT headlines are written by Twitter critics. Interesting.
The public has always indirectly shaped the content of media. Editors are conscious of what headline will cause readers to choose an article to read. Headlines were used on the front page to get someone to buy a newspaper. Now it's click bait.
Twitter and social media has sped up the feedback process.
Nice to see Howard being his usually slimy buffoon.
“I'm just reflecting your shit back to you people.”
Does the existence of this blog annoy you Howard? All your trolling does is reenforce the ideas that you seem to want to undermine by giving such weak counterarguments that the inevitable conclusion people will draw is that “if this is the best argument liberasl have got....”
It’s like inoculation.
At least Howard is not as transparently a "fifty center" as R/V who does his trolling in service of the Chinese attempts to undermine Trump by attacking farmers, copying his laughable talking points probably right off a blast fax out of Beijing.
More accurate NYT;
"Assailing hate without assailing guns is a hate crime!"
It's the headline about China and trade wars that bother me. We've just passed the centenary of WWI. That's about the length of time it takes to forget the useful lessons of history. Some of the early battles of WWI cost a quarter of a million of casualties in a few days. No one said WTF. They said "press on". "The spirit of the French army is attack, attack, always attack," said one French general as he prepared plans for the next assault after a battle with especially grievous losses.....There is a far more debate about how to handle mass shootings than how to handle this trade war. I can see this trade war getting out of hand and having catastrophic consequences. I don't think any policy we adopt against lunatics with guns, bombs, or trucks will much alter the course of history.
I love this blog. It's perfect for conducting Gonzo Deplorable Anthropology.
The Chinese ruling clique which have propagated the white nationalist slander.
Why is it that gun laws are perceived to have failed if they do not prevent a particular crime from being committed? It strikes me that when rapes, robberies or non-firearm murders are committed, politicians don’t tell us we need more laws against those crimes. It’s only firearms laws that are held to an impossible standard of 100% crime prevention or we need more laws, rather than understanding that existing laws might be a deterrent to some crimes (hopefully, but don’t count on it) and providing a means of punishment once a crime has been committed.
rehajm said...
The other issue is what motivated Nate to call attention to the error. Most likely to help NYT avoid any perception of Trump-like by it's readers. See? They fixed it!
Nate's Twitter feed is filled with lefties claiming they cancelled their NYT subscriptions for 'normalizing' President Trump. I suspect Nate knows this is a serious economic problem for NYT, since all NYTs has left is leftie subscribers.
I don't see China backing down. They probably figure any attempts at ameliorating the situation will be seen in Hong Kong as a sign of weakness. Trump is not exactly a disciple of Adam Smith when it comes to free trade. Things could get really bad.....For the record, I think Trump is better equipped to manage a trade deal with China than Hillary, but only in the sense that that Haig was better equipped to manage a war than Kitchener.....The best outcome for both parties is not to win the trade war, but to find a way to peace.....Trump has a surprising amount of support for his position. It would be passing strange if the one policy that he was wrong about was also the one policy that Democrats gave him their support.
Over at Slate they have a piece making it look like NYT changed the headline because President Trump’s putative challengers complained about it.
the sense that that Haig was better equipped to manage a war than Kitchener..
Sending 60,000 men charging into machine guns is managing? Got it.
They were mad because the headline implied Trump wasn't a racist. People need help.
They've spent all their time and energy crafting an alternate reality where they are making a Righteous Stand against Trump-Hilter rounding up homosexuals and executing blacks in the street. Any effort to dispel that illusion is considered an act of violence.
Why do we bother to reason with these people again?
They engage in their own consensual hallucination like the matrix
Ann once again provides a safe space for deplorable snowflakes
Howard,
I thought you could do better than reprising Inga. You guys seem like the internet version of Antifa.
You are not helping your cause.
You guys seem like the internet version of Antifa.
Howard Antifa ?
Much too energetic.
"the editorial opinion shoehorned into a news headline"
Surprise!
"What Trump talked about is the news and that's what the headline should say."
That's what it should say! You are so nice. But perhaps it's beginning to dawn that the NYT and the WaPo and all the rest don't give a damn about your nice standards?
"There's an infinite number of things that Trump didn't talk about, and headlines shouldn't report what didn't happen."
No, it shouldn't. It's terrible! It's sad!
"The choice to put one thing that didn't happen in a headline — embracing gun control — turns it from news into opinion."
Surprise! Progs turn news into opinion! Anyway, they despise you and your petty bourgeois standards about what news should and shouldn't be.
"CORRECTION: When I wrote all of the above, I believed that "Trump Urges Unity vs. Racism" was the second headline!"
Now that's funny. Seriously.
"the NYT apparently changed the headline to appease people who expected a better demonstration of hostility toward Trump."
OK, prog "paper" appeases progs. Surprise!
As opposed to appeasing conservative former subscribers who only objected to the SWIFT treason on the front page.
Why rush called it drive by media:
https://mobile.twitter.com/CNBC/status/1158744357182291968
Michael K said...
You guys seem like the internet version of Antifa.
Howard Antifa ?
Much too energetic.
Howie's just dialing it in at this point, he needs a Turing test or if not a Voight-Kampff test since empathy seems beyond his ken.
Although since he's openly baiting the blog hostess for a banning, which I suppose he will then openly rebel and shitpost worse than ever, and challenge her to mop up after him, he may have empathy after all...how can you be a sadist without having empathy?
Althouse, funny how you want more leftists to comment on your blog, and this is how leftists comment on your blog. But, as I always say, you like what is bad.
I tend to ignore the headline when reading a newspaper article; the first paragraph and byline are more instructive as to bias, severe bias or outright propaganda.
@ Howard - plenty of racism-inspired slaughter, but do we have many examples of sexism-inspired slaughter? I found one (https://www.theguardian.com/world/2012/dec/03/montreal-massacre-canadas-feminists-remember) but it's a bit dated. Has this become a thing?
TRUMP ASSAILS HATE BUT NOT SELF
Safe, Legal, and Rare. We need to normalize diversity and abortion to reduce color judgments and dead children, respectively.
"The greatest sin is media bias, not racism and sexism inspired slaughter. Ann once again provides a safe space for deplorable snowflakes"
False choice, dipshit.
Accidental moment of objective journalism changed to appease AOC level bias.
Invest with 400$ and get a returns of 10,000$ within seven business working days.
Why wasting your precious time online looking for a loan? When there is an opportunity for you to invest with 400$ and get a returns of 10,000$ within seven business working days. Contact us now for more information if interested on how you can earn big with just little amount. This is all about investing into Crude Oil and Gas Business.
Email: investmoneyoilgasfast@gmail.com
#Walk Away
#Cancel the D-hack Press.
WaPo & NYT
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez
✔
@AOC
Let this front page serve as a reminder of how white supremacy is aided by - and often relies upon - the cowardice of mainstream institutions.
Scott Adams, like me, gives Trump an F for his speech. Idiotic move.
Why is Trump even buying into the idea that these shootings are about racism, as opposed to mental illness?
Adams is after persuasion rating. I'm after insight rating.
And the NYT apparently changed the headline to appease people who expected a better demonstration of hostility toward Trump.
They know their audience.
Isn't it almost always guns that stop the murdering? How can we blame the guns? If guns are the problem, why do let cops have them, or soldiers? The evil little devices could turn at any time and attack the good guys. That would be bad.
"Beto: Trump 'has no place' in El Paso"
Wow--President Trump got Beto to support strong and secure borders!
Hes mostly focusing on mental illness, which is a common variable in all these incidents.
I'd suggest "Individualism vs. Racism," but that's ol' reactionary me.
Why are "liberals" always expounding against hate? I mean, they're always busy promoting hatred of liberty.
Right narciso.
And given the racist element in the El Paso "manifesto", it would have been stupid to not address that. As if Trump doing so gives the media more than if he hadn't. Nonsense.
Of course, he could have just chalked it up the outrage to female soap opera mentality.
That would do it.
It's a hot August. I worry the center won't hold.
it's a concern, because can't distinguish between reality and perception, the media is actively designed to prevent such awareness,
Hey, I like guns!
There is no other device ever invented that so completely delivers equality to women, minorities and the weak. For example: Most men can at will do whatever they want to most women, including assault, rob, rape, or kill. That there is some serious inequality, and no law or social construct can prevent that in any satisfying way. Give that woman a gun, and a little training, and guess what? She is not only equal to any man, she is more powerful than any man not equally armed, and even then, she is still at least equal. She in no longer at the will of any man, any person, or even any beast. She is even delivered from the fear that also makes her unequal in mind and choices. She is truely as free and safe as is humanly possible.
How could anyone who claims to be a feminist, a liberal, a conservative, or a social justice warrior want her rights to self-defense infringed? The same goes for minorities who face mobs, or the weak who face bullies and predators.
Gun control has a history of being used by the strong to keep the weak and minorities in check, to prevent them from claiming their equality, and that's what it still does today. It sure doesn't stop any criminals from assaulting, robbing or killing - not here, not anywhere.
Problem: Crazy people getting guns and killing people. Question: To prevent this should we focus on the crazy people or the guns? Analysis: There are hundreds of millions of guns in the US, the vast majority of which are owned by law-abiding (and voting) citizens. There are tens of thousands of crazy people who are potential mass murders. Conclusion: It makes sense to focus on preventing the crazy people from getting the guns. Further Conclusion: It won’t work, but it will do less harm than trying to eliminate all privately owned guns.
"How could anyone who claims to be a feminist, a liberal, a conservative, or a social justice warrior want her rights to self-defense infringed? "
Somewhere there are "feminists" who would argue men shouldn't have guns.
This is not suggested here, but it does suggest violence against women as a red flag for later mass shooting:
https://nwlc.org/blog/disarming-hate-is-a-feminist-issue/
Charlie Eklund said, "Why is it that gun laws are perceived to have failed if they do not prevent a particular crime from being committed? It strikes me that when rapes, robberies or non-firearm murders are committed, politicians don’t tell us we need more laws against those crimes. It’s only firearms laws that are held to an impossible standard of 100% crime prevention or we need more laws, rather than understanding that existing laws might be a deterrent to some crimes (hopefully, but don’t count on it) and providing a means of punishment once a crime has been committed."
C'mon, Charlie. You know the answer. Or you should. It's because these shootings are the reason for calls for gun control. They're the EXCUSE. The desire to disarm everyone (else) pre-exists in the souls of would-be tyrants, and they'll use any argument they can to try to convince people to vote against their own freedom and safety and give up their guns. If it weren't these shootings, it would be something else.
If, magically, gun violence ceased today and never would another citizen be killed by a gun, they'd just find another exucse to demand that the public disarm themselves. The goal never changes, only the arguments used to support it. (Like "climate change", basically.)
So glad I’m going camping tomorrow morning. During that time, I ain’t discussing politics or looking at my phone. I need a break from all of this tank stupidity and dishonesty.
...and if this theme couldn't get any more bizarre, that guy Beto (remember him? No? Me either...) is trying to score points siding with the subscription cancelers.
What the fuck?
One thing it clarifies- lefties expect MSM to promote their side. Definitive.
back on your heads:
https://www.chron.com/news/world/article/Anxious-wait-for-Puerto-Rico-as-court-mulls-14284587.php
Just remember- the problem with Democrats isn't that people understand their leftie policies blow bison but that the media fails to craft perfect headlines to project thier message.
"This is not suggested here, but it does suggest violence against women as a red flag for later mass shooting:"
If so, then that's another reason additional gun control is counterproductive. The abused women might have eliminated a few mass shooters before they graduated to that level. It sure is no surprise if the same cowards who shoot up unarmed people also abuse women. Cowards gotta cowar.
Q: If the story is the Dow Jones increasing by over 300 points (1.2%) in a single day, how should the headline read?
A: "Markets bounce around". (Washington Post Tuesday afternoon Aug 6)
Satan worship and leftist politics seem to be a common thread with many of these young mass shooters.
No one spreads more hate than the Gray Lady daily.
"When the President Is a Bigot, the Poison Spreads"
"Trump Is a White Nationalist Who Inspires Terrorism"
"This Is the Violence Latinos Have Been Dreading"
Y'know, in case no one noticed.
Scott Adams hated it. So did M. Savage. but Trump did the right thing.
Just make a standard "I'm against blah blah" speech. No one is going to vote Trump in 2020 because he made a NUANCED speech and TOLD THE TRUTH.
Its sad its that way. its sad, a POTUS can't tell the truth and make a Grown-up speech about a mass killing. But that's the way it is.
Both these killers were mentally ill. Both had "red flags" that should have been caught. The body count was increased due to the weapons involved - but "Gun Control" wouldn't have stopped either killer from murdering large numbers.
Ban High Capacity Mags. They'll just carry more pistols - and use homemade explosives.
The laws are already in place to keep guns away from crazies. but people aren't reporting the perps.
In the big picture: How many people are killed every year because of open borders? And crooks/Killer being let in? How many are killed every year because we are "soft on crime"? 12,000 homoicides.
The MSM really has a hold on our mind. They have the microphone and drive the agenda.
Ban High Capacity Mags
I’m not necessarily against this. Those last couple of rounds are hard to load in there sometimes, especially if the mag is new and the spring is still tight- ya really gotta bear down.
Somewhere there are "feminists" who would argue men shouldn't have guns.
This is not suggested here, but it does suggest violence against women as a red flag for later mass shooting:
About 20 years ago, the was an LA radio talk show guy named Michael Jackson. A lefty.
One time he had the LA police chief on for a show about guns. I was laughing so hard, I almost drove off the road. EVERY caller was a woman who said she carried a gun and "would not be a victim." The chief would lecture them, then the next caller was just the same. It went on for over an hour.
My daughters all have guns and have trained to shoot.
especially if the mag is new and the spring is still tight- ya really gotta bear down.
I have a couple of mag loaders. The Beretta especially.
the one lawsuit the times won't support:
https://babalublog.com/2019/08/06/castro-dictatorship-to-defend-itself-in-court-against-lawsuit-by-exxon-over-stolen-property-in-cuba/
Howard said...
The greatest sin is media bias, not racism and sexism inspired slaughter. Ann once again provides a safe space for deplorable snowflakes
The real problem is you are a piece of shit and a member of a party that wants open borders, endless wars, and is trying to start a race war.
Of course democrats can't run on their platform or admit what they want so they call their enemies sexist racists.
It is all stupid people like Howard have left.
The headline change reminds me of when the Sierra Club did a huge amount of research and came up with the sensible plan that we should embrace natural gas as a far cleaner alternative to coal and which emitted half the CO2 and complementary to today’s renewables as a stepping stone to nuclear and workable renewables. The members went apeshit and they threw out their report and did what the members wanted, which they knew to be unworkable.
REplying to Michael K. No doubt you've seen this but there is a David French article on National Review today headlined: "My family has been threatened by racists. Why should they outgun me?" It sounds like that sentiment was shared by the women callers you describe.
Replying to rocean: I had a conversation with a friend who argued that outlawing certain types of magazines or clips would address the problem. I asked the friend if she imagined a situation in which a person would say, "I was planning on killing a lot of people, but I guess I can't because I wouldn't modify a clip -- modifying a clip would be illegal." We moved on to other subjects.
Howard said...
The greatest sin is media bias, not racism and sexism inspired slaughter.
Completely backwards. It's the media bias driving the racism and sexism theme over and over. It's the media bias delivering misinformation, distorted and manipulated facts and selective narratives.
Just this morning, our local news played a clip of the Charlottesville comments made by President Trump but completely omitted the part where he specifically and clearly denounced the white supremacist movement.
And the NYT apparently changed the headline to appease people who expected a better demonstration of hostility toward Trump.
But you'll continue to rely on it for your news anyway.
To use parenthesis as in a math equation: Trump Urges (Unity vs. Racism).
Take my poll:
How often are you overcome by these "Trump Urges"?
What are they like?
How do you satisfy them?
Oso Negro. The Ohio shooter is an Incel whom plays in a woman hating band.
Achilles: I thought you said that you people would start a shooting war. Now that your Boy in El Paso has followed your instructions, why are you being so shy about taking credit
The Ohio shooter is an Incel whom plays in a woman hating band.
Who the authorities were repeatedly warned about because of his deranged violent fantasies, yet did nothing.
Exactly Gahrie, we need to get serious about gun nutball control.
Exactly Gahrie, we need to get serious about gun nutball control.
Nooo..we need to put crazy people in institutions instead of simply suspending them from school, and then allowing them to roam around freely indulging their violent fantasies.
Gun control doesn't work. Ask the Brits. They've banned guns, so the crazies use knives instead. So now they're trying to ban knives. Next cricket bats. Then tree limbs.
Nate Silver is still unhappy that he got Election Night wrong. Just like the NYT. Just like CNN. Just like MSNBC. Just like the rest of the MSM. A trillion liberal tears being cried in a loud voice, like a baby with a loaded diaper.
Now that your Boy in El Paso has followed your instructions, why are you being so shy about taking credit
Not our boy, lefty. All the lefties complain about rightist violence but they always seem to be the ones pulling the trigger.
Replying to Michael K. No doubt you've seen this but there is a David French article on National Review
David French is one of Howard's incels.
Howard said...
Oso Negro. The Ohio shooter is an Incel whom plays in a woman hating band.
--
And a Warren supporter...
Howard: we need to get serious about gun nutball control.
That's mighty generous of you, but self-admits get to check out on their own.
How about you just nod along vigorously as we fill out your paperwork?
Those last couple of rounds are hard to load in there sometimes, especially if the mag is new and the spring is still tight- ya really gotta bear down.
Don't. Go with 26 or 27. Every time I've had a feed jam its from the full 30 round mag.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा