Stelter’s firing and CNN’s broader mandate to shift toward more straight news reporting and less host-opinionating is perhaps part of a larger recalibration in media, as outlets try to find their footing in a post-Trump world; better to emphasize the 'unbiased' nature of your journalism than engage in constant debates about how attacks on the press threaten American democracy—though there’s definitely something to that.
Is that stream-of-consciousness or how you write when you're straining to tart things up? I think she's saying bias against Trump won high ratings when Trump was President, but now, the cost/benefit analysis is different, and the strategy of seeming "unbiased" is probably better.
The next sentence may be even more challenging:
As the country’s political system has devolved and journalism has been sucked into the jet stream of the Democratic Party—the only major party committed to defending First Amendment freedoms—news organizations are trying to break through to a greater number of Americans.
I cannot get my head around the Democrat Party as "committed to defending First Amendment freedoms." What's that based on? It doesn't resonate with me, and I've been watching the Democratic Party closely every day since January 14, 2004. I'm going to omit that phrase entirely and edit the rest into something as clear as I can make it: TV news, coopted by the Democratic Party, would like non-Democrats to watch.
Figures like Stelter, CNN bosses seem to have determined, endanger their ability to appeal to a wider audience. It’s unclear, though, whether the mealy-mouthed center will hold any allure, either."
"Mealy-mouthed" means "Reticent; not outspoken; afraid to speak one's mind or to use plain terms. Also (now the usual sense): ingratiating, unctuous; hypocritical" (OED). That's about all it's going to be, isn't it? Viewers can tell, can't we?
Posts
104 comments:
Shorter version: Some things happened to some people because of Trump.
Democratic Party — the only major party committed to defending First Amendment freedoms
Biden's White House tells the social-media companies which users to ban. Then those bans are done quite frequently.
The Democrats' justification is alleged "misinformation".
I think that the scare quotes around "unbiased" do the bulk of the work of that first sentence. The fact that the writer thinks that attacks on an obviously partisan press are attacks on 'democracy itself" is more of it, and "mealy mouthed center" does the rest of the work to carry the writer's meaning.
"As the country’s political system has devolved and journalism has been sucked into the jet stream of the Democratic Party—the only major party committed to defending First Amendment freedoms— news organizations are trying to break through to a greater number of Americans. "
The democrat Party media is so in love with itself. They really do think that if anyone dare to mock or complain or expose the hack-D press overt One party bias - How dare they!
We have a RIGHT to offer legitimate criticism of the press and doing so is NOT "anti first amendment" geeez. The hacks cannot release themselves from their own insular hackness.
Comically obtuse. Or maybe cosmically obtuse. I maintain that the 1st Amendment, as written, would not gather 50% support of the Democratic congressional caucus in an honest, secret vote.
The left used Hillary's hand built lies to try and smear Trump as a Russian asset. They breathlessly reported lies for 3+ years. But it's the democrat party who are glorious and worthy of such first amendment free speech praise - from the hack(D) loyalist press.
All while it is Hillary herself who used her Private server to fill Clinton coffers with Russian money.
Althouse said...The truth is, I don't watch any TV news channels.
I don't either. I'll see highlight clips on Twitter. I don't have cable so I don't even watch Tucker, who I believe is a needed voice of truth. His monologues are available.
I was having breakfast yesterday at a small café in Franksville, WI. They had Chuck Todd's "Meet the Press" on the one TV. It wrecked breakfast at a nice café. All Liz Cheney this, Trump is "dangerous" that. Complete fucking bullshit propaganda. These people are insane. And, they despise half the country. How do they sit there and just talk about bullshit they know is not true?
Even if CNN makes moves toward "the middle", I don't think they are going to pull in any new viewers. Fuck them forever. They are a 100% propaganda network with really self-absorbed, evil people on air.
It's hard to believe there is a portion of this country that believes what these people are pushing is true.
I tried tuning into CNN to see if it was any different a few weeks ago, but nope, gadfly could have been writing the copy.
Ding Dong
Potato Gone!
Which old spud?
The dullest spud!
As if canning Steltato would get that "wider audience appeal" they're seeking. Psssha!
To more clearly express the author's intent, I would revise
"It’s unclear, though, whether the mealy-mouthed center will hold any allure, either."
to
"It’s unclear, though, whether the mealy-mouthed center will hold any allure for me."
To more clearly express the author's intent, I would revise
"It’s unclear, though, whether the mealy-mouthed center will hold any allure, either."
to
"It’s unclear, though, whether the mealy-mouthed center will hold any allure for me."
That includes the January 6th riot/insurrection and the investigation into it.
Do you really believe it was an insurrection?
To more clearly express the author's intent, I would revise
"It’s unclear, though, whether the mealy-mouthed center will hold any allure, either."
to
"It’s unclear, though, whether the mealy-mouthed center will hold any allure for me."
I think it means that they didn’t agitate to re-write libel law like one of the 2016 candidates did. And it’s not the liberals on the court who are agitating to re-decide NYTimes vs. Sullivan.
Anyway, this Malone guy is an extremist octogenarian billionaire who wants to remake CNN into another FOX network. A laudable goal, but one I can’t support just on the basis of the fact that I’m too pro-American to boost models of foreign-owned media like the Murdoch family’s enterprises. Rupert and sons look at their media companies in other countries like properties on a Monopoly board. Taking over country by country that they infiltrate.
I remember when conservatives were America first and would have opposed this sort of outright foreign ownership of our media and meddling in American affairs.
It's hard to believe that the New Yorker writer actually believes that the Democratic Party is committed to the First Amendment. That has to be a joke, or is she just crazy?
with a goal of rejiggering CNN’s programming, scrubbing it of liberal political valence....
====
valence = violence
Gusty Winds..
It's incredible and so unbelievably tired. All the leftist hack Pro-Democrat party press have is Trump hate and Trump obsession. Trump Trump Trump Trump Trump.
They haters and hivemind democrat party loyalists love it. The rest of us just turn away.
Mitigating the progress of a liberal expanse to reporting in a limited frame of reference. Time will tell if the new model indulges the modern model to narrate handmade tales with em-pathetic appeal.
His ratings sucked for good reason. He deserved it.
Hopefully CNN will never again be lead by someone like Zucker who was totally enthralled by Trump. CNN would show most of Trumps rallies in full leading up to the 2016 election. Of course Zucker was responsible for greenlighting The Apprentice and making Trump a star.
What Gusty Wind said...
Interesting, I read rejiggering CNN’s programming, scrubbing it of liberal political valence... as rejiggering CNN’s programming, scrubbing it of liberal political violence.... For, indeed, I guess I've bought into the speech is violence idea spouted by liberal media but as progressive projection of their own evil intent.
"Unbiased" is all make-believe. It does not exist in human nature. Pretending it is real, doesn't make it exist.
The media's claims of being unbiased are lies. We all know that. Same thing with judges. If judges were truly unbiased, there wouldn't be such a fight regarding Supreme Court and lower court nominees.
This is especially true in Wisconsin where Supreme Court Elections are 100% political.
I like the idea that "Trump Resistance" should refer to the conderacy of dunces so opposed to Trump, rather than those who worry and wonder about the shadiness of the 2020 election. I hope that more than just Trump supporters are dismayed by some aspects of the 2020 election.
And the idea that the Democratic Party is the only party defending the 1st Amendment is rather bizarre. My leaning toward Republicanism is in Part due to the abandonment of liberalism, including free speech, by Democrats.
I was diagramming the first quote until the semicolon. I stopped at the hyphen of the second, because it's bullshit afterwards. Democrats defend free speech, yet it is Biden that has his DHS creating an unit to police speech. It is nonsense like this that turned me away from mass media news and their in-house supposed critics.
Never watch cable news. Oh, every once in a while, I watch the compilations of them reporting Trump's 2016 victory. As Arnold put it: Crush your enemies, see them driven before you and hear the lamentation of their women and Van Jones.
Breaking News…Elon Musk has made an offer to buy the FBI from the Clintons. But only on condition that the FBI’s media operations called CNN has at least 95% real viewers. Oh well, Elon had better stick to Mars passenger transportation and battery powered cars.
As the country’s political system has devolved and journalism has been sucked into the jet stream of the Democratic Party...news organizations are trying to break through to a greater number of Americans
Even if you remove the 'First Amendment' parenthetical that analogy doesn't make sense. The political system is devolving but the *Democrat Party* has a jet stream that is sucking in journalism? A jet stream would be created by a fast moving plane cruising towards its destination, not something I'd associate with a devolving system that could be about to crash and burn. It makes more sense and coincides with history better to read it in reverse. Journalism has devolved as the media assumed the mantle of being the opposition party to Republicans in general, with the Democrat Party being sucked in to the media vortex and buffeted by an agenda they aren't setting.
John Malone has charged Chris Licht with the task of cleaning up CNN and restoring it to some semblance of what it once was--a mostly reliable nonbiased news source (even though it has not been such for at least the last 30 years).
That is a task greater than Hercule's labors at cleaning the Augean Stables. And Mr.Licht has to deal with the same stuff as Hercules---there's a lot of it on the floor in and around CNN's current "talent". Tater was just the first shovelful.
To me, "the X resistance" calls to mind the French Resistance. These were the French and they were resisting the Nazis. To use the term "the Trump resistance" to mean the people who are resisting Trump would be like thinking the French Resistance is a way to refer to the Nazis.
zaslav is cutting through the dead weight, like bantha, cnn is the worst rated networks outside of headline news,
CNN has a long long way to go before anyone should call it "journalism" again. Fire a couple of lunatics, and that still leaves a place full of lunatics.
Maybe Kamala doesn't write her own speeches.
Nationwide reported on February 15, "Hate crimes rose 44% last year in study of major cities." The media insisted that hate cries rose upon the election of President Donald John Trump.
It didn't. It skyrocketed under Biden.
H/T Don Surber
https://www.ny1.com/nyc/all-boroughs/news/2022/02/14/hate-crime-increase-2021-asian-american-
I cannot get my head around the Democrat Party as "committed to defending First Amendment freedoms." What's that based on?
This reader thinks it is based on a complete inability to see outside the definition of the party (the party of the writer, as defined by this article) as a binary agent of good against an entity that is dedicated to the end of those freedoms (embodied in Florida's 'Don't Say Gay' edits). I have to believe the writer is either cynical or completely invested in that definition as an unassailable truth. She might as well have been flogging the Communist party as the final defender of the proletariat in Pravda in 1937. The whole thing also seems a bit Soviet, including the endless sentences in search of a reason to live.
"... the Democratic Party—the only major party committed to defending First Amendment freedoms...." Seriously?
It's difficult to know whether the writer lives in delusional lefty world or is so ignorant as to believe that only fake news from the leftmediaswine is protected by the First Amendment. Either way the statement beggars belief.
What Christy said at 10:23!!
Excellent point, Ann. I kind of like "the Trump resistance" as "the resistance, led by Trump, to all the bullshit they're trying to foist on us."
Gusty Winds, sorry to hear about your ruined breakfast. But I understand there was a bright spot in that Chuck Todd was near tears describing some NBC poll results that looked super negative for the Democrats.
I at least hope the hash browns were crispy.
According to yahoo news, 650,000 people watched Mr. Potatohead every day. About *80 percent were over the age of 54.
That's in a country of 330 million people. Even when you throw out children and teens, Seltzer was probably getting 1 American in 300.
Personally, i found him unwatchable. Physcially unattractive. A terrible voice, and of average intelligence. He was Jeff Zucker's mini-me. Just as bald. Just as Jewish. just as leftwing. And about as smart. You don't have to have talent to be on CNN or MSNBC, you just have to know the right people and have the right politics.
I cannot get my head around the Democrat Party as "committed to defending First Amendment freedoms." What's that based on?
I'm guessing establishment clause (while completely ignoring freedom of religion) as well as government having a say in what books libraries stack and what subjects teachers discuss (as if public school teachers and public library librarians are not government employees whos3 work is subject to government oversight)
"At Zucker’s Trump-baiting CNN, Stelter thrived.
If by "thrived," they mean made a lot of money for doing not a lot of work, then yes, Stelter thrived. But in every other sense, this sentence has about as much truth value as "the Democratic Party—the only major party committed to defending First Amendment freedoms"
The truth is, I don't watch any TV news channels.
There's something I haven't thought about in a while--you used to do a Sunday morning round-up of news talk shows. Do they not exist anymore?
This from a magazine that once prided itself for its crystalline prose.
Malone seems like she really didn't want to write that article for The New Yorker. She went to some effort to lean as far to the left as she could, without omitting or misstating any facts.
During Trump's presidency, CNN, like other news outlets, seemed to only be able to focus on one story at a time. It was 24 hours of Trump, then Covid, then Ukraine. If CNN can become skeptical of Democrat press releases and cover more than the current narrative, they may do fine.
Ann Althouse said...To use the term "the Trump resistance" to mean the people who are resisting Trump would be like thinking the French Resistance is a way to refer to the Nazis.
True, but I don't know that I've seen it called "the Trump Resistance" or used to refer to Trump's supporters. I think I've always heard it called simply The Resistance and used to mean the resistance to Trump. Because, as always, Trump is the Nazi.
The use of the word "trump resistance" always makes me laugh. Almost every Billionaire, Wall street banker and establishment Republican, not to mention the entire elite media, elite lawyers, and elite academia, hates Trump.
Its like someone in Stalin's politboro claiming to part of the "resistance". And attacking the Kulaks.
As althouse states, its supposed to bring to mind the "French resistance" a bunch of anonymous little people fighting a massive occupying power with nothing more then their wits and a few molotov cocktails. In this case, the "Trump resistance" is the massive occupying power upset that some of the peasants elected a man they didn't like.
Trump's people and "our Posterity" resist Nazis/Dezis progress.
Using the word "valence" means the writer doesn't want to communicate.
Tater Taken To Toolshed Told To Take-off
I Am Part of the Resistance Inside the Trump Administration
Oh, the memories.
Are we missing the point here? Isn’t the Democratic Party committed to reconstructing the US Constitution, as it has been at least since Woodrow Wilson? What the Dems are really interested in is government by “experts”, experts appointed and approved by them. Doesn’t that explain academia’s love affair with the Dems? Where will those experts come from? Surely not “the great unwashed”. They will be blessed by tech titans, professors, internationalists, professors, and professors. Davos Man in his native element—all blessed you elections on which only informed opinions will be allowed.
Look on Brian Stelter. Tater will be your new Minister of Truth. The Constitution, a relic of a bygone age, will mean what he says it means. Adam Schiff will give his blessing. Liz Cheney will wonder what happened. She thought Trump was the problem. David Brooks will tut-tut and say Stelter needs a new tailor.
in andrew marr's head of state, they described a nearly sentient organism comprising media big business et al, all pushing to retain the UK,
in the italian import, devils, they review the run up to brexit, and nearly all involved, seemed to be on board,
To get to the essence of the matter, I'd prune it down even further: "journalism has...sucked"
Isn't that what The New Yorker does, though? Borderline word salads, with convoluted sentence structure; just enough to keep you interested, and thinking that you understand what they are saying.
As the country’s political system has devolved and journalism has been sucked into the jet stream of the Democratic Party—the only major party committed to defending First Amendment freedoms
Tell me you're a dishonest partisan hack with nothing of value to offer without saying those words
The left didn't call themselves the "Trump Resistance", but they have been calling themselves "The Resistance" since Trump won, deliberately evokingas Althouse said, the French resistance to the Nazis, as if they were crouching over a dynamite plunger in a snowy wood, waiting for a troop train to cross a trestle instead of hunching over an iPhone in a coffee shop waiting for Likes.
I remember when conservatives were America first and would have opposed this sort of outright foreign ownership of our media and meddling in American affairs.
As a Trump hater you are amusing. I think it's confusion as much as anything.
Don Surber thinks firing Tater is a mistake.
But I also laugh because the new management made a boner. He worked cheap and filled dead Sunday morning airtime for the channel. This is a foolish move. No one will say, well, now that they got rid of Stelter, I am going to watch CNN.
Yes, Tater filled a time slot and worked cheap. CNN does not get its revenue from ads. It is all cable fees.
Ann Althouse said...
"To me, "the X resistance" calls to mind the French Resistance. These were the French and they were resisting the Nazis. To use the term "the Trump resistance" to mean the people who are resisting Trump would be like thinking the French Resistance is a way to refer to the Nazis."
But that's the point, isn't it?
Democrats can't even be democratic in picking their nominees for a Presidential election...
The concept of "Trump Resistance" meaning resistance to Trump is not new to me. I always understood Althouse combination had a different meaning. However, I know civil servants at NASA that proudly called themselves "The Resistance". They likened themselves to the Star Wars "Resistance" fighting against the evil space Nazis, but even in the Star Wars movie, "The Resistance" seemed an odd phrase. After all, "The Resistance" was made up of loyalist to the government fighting an entity external to the government. Once you understand why this misuse of the historical term "The Resistance" makes sense to them; then you'll understand they don't like Trump because he is an outsider. Trump and his supporters are dangerous outsiders, and it is only right to attack them with whatever you got.
"Trump is "dangerous" that. Complete fucking bullshit propaganda. These people are insane"
They're not insane. Because Trump IS dangerous.
TO THEM.
Trump is going around telling people what these batshit crazy fuckers are doing to this country. A lot of people are then deciding that the only way to deal with batshit crazy fuckers is to put them into institutions of some sort, with bars, locks, big white jackets and Nurse Ratched to hand out their meds.
That's the danger Chuck Todd faces: Being labotomized in the cuckcoo's nest.
"Trump is "dangerous" that. Complete fucking bullshit propaganda. These people are insane"
They're not insane. Because Trump IS dangerous.
TO THEM.
Trump is going around telling people what these batshit crazy fuckers are doing to this country. A lot of people are then deciding that the only way to deal with batshit crazy fuckers is to put them into institutions of some sort, with bars, locks, big white jackets and Nurse Ratched to hand out their meds.
That's the danger Chuck Todd faces: Being labotomized in the cuckcoo's nest.
The new CNN will still be "liberal," but not liberal or progressive enough for the New Yorker. Hardly anybody is.
Clare Malone comes very close to admitting that CNN and the rest of the Establishment media are biased towards the Democrats, but justifies that by saying that only the Democrats defend press freedom.
This is very strange considering all of the censorship and thought control that both the media and the Democrats have been promoting. It's doubly strange when you remember that Stelter was supposed to be a critic of the media, not a cheerleader. Somehow Brian and Clare have come to identify criticism of the media as an assault on the freedom of the press.
I don' have cable anymore, but I try not to miss Rita Panahi's Biden clips.
Democrats can't even be democratic in picking their nominees for a Presidential election.
Democrats are being true to their nature in standing for the democratic/dictatorial duality.
(or just to rewrite this in as few words as possible):
Stelter’s firing and CNN’s broader mandate to shift toward more straight news reporting and less host-opinionating is perhaps part of a larger recalibration in media, as outlets try to find their footing in a post-Trump world; better to emphasize the 'unbiased' nature of your journalism than engage in constant debates about how attacks on the press threaten American democracy—though there’s definitely something to that.
here's my go at it! "CNN keeps losing money, and is running out of money to lose."
actually, just: "CNN runs out of money"
"I remember when conservatives were America first and would have opposed this sort of outright foreign ownership of our media and meddling in American affairs."
Concern Troll is very concerned.
He was Jeff Zucker's mini-me. Just as bald. Just as Jewish. just as leftwing. And about as smart.
Mr. Potato Head is indeed short, fat, bald, and stupid, but not Jewish, so far as I have been able to find out. His wife is though.
When I had cable, I'd catch a few minutes of Humpty's show just to see how crazy the world is. He was an unconscious self-parody, and it was hilarious, though I could only take so much.
“Do you really believe it was an insurrection?”
No. It was a demonstration that included trespassing.
"...the Democratic Party—the only major party committed to defending First Amendment freedoms..." Almost chocked when I saw that one.
But, beside the point, TV ratings show that most TV news shows get less than three million viewers on a typical night. Some a lot less than that. Sounds like a lot until you recall that the U.S. population is near 340 million. Factor out kids, etc., even the most watched network shows get less than 2% of the population. I haven't watched TV news for decades. And you know what? The planet still spins on it's axis, the sun still rises and sets daily, the seasons change in their due order. In a nutshell, life goes on. Now, we don't even have TV at our house which makes me wonder: How many citizens never watch TV news? How many U.S. households do not even have TV? 2%? More? How much more?
"No. It was a demonstration that included trespassing."
Ann got it exactly right. Too bad Creighton law professors couldn't see it clearly for what it was.
John Malone and David Z of Discovery are in charge now. Businessmen. They've seen CNN's numbers. It has too change.
I wouldn't be surprised if they spun CNN off in order to cash out. I'd short CNN if it was a separate company.
I agree on the demonstration/trespassing. Now, what do you think about the way those who were arrested have been treated? I think most people really haven't thought about that. Maybe because thinking about it would shake you to your core. I honestly don't know what can be done about it...it's like those holding them are above the law.
Althouse said...No. It was a demonstration that included trespassing.
This trespassing is very interesting seeing as there is PLENTY of video footage showing the Capitol Police moving barricades and opening/holding doors for the trespassers. Come on in! The water's warm!!!
The J6 committee nor has the MSM every really asked "WTF was that Ray Epps guy doing"? Why isn't Ray Epps being held as a political prisoner like so many other trespassers? We know the answer to that.
Americans have been told these trespassers are worse than the 9/11 terrorists. It was the biggest threat to "our democracy" since Fort Sumter and Pearl Harbor. The hyperbole and propaganda never ends.
And the HUGE problem is...so much of the American public on the left has bought into this bullshit. Even if they don't believe it, they promote it a regurgitate it. There are millions of Inga's and Gadfly's out there.
No. It was a demonstration that included trespassing.
Thank you Althouse.
It is always reassuring to find another sane, open minded and reasonable liberal.
"...a demonstration that included trespassing...".
I bet that opinion is not common in Madison, but it is accurate. A key fact: no arms at the Capitol. You can't overthrow a government of a country without armed cadres. The people that talked about weapons beforehand did not bring them to the Capitol.
No. It was a demonstration that included trespassing.
But not destruction of public and private property, a few killings, threats against public officials? I’m certain not every act successfully prosecuted for that event was just for a charge of trespassing. In fact, over 890 people have been charged, 363 guilty pleas entered and many counts (already pled guilty to) beyond trespassing - including assaults, physical violence, resisting officers, civil disorder, etc. The records are publicly available, and since they were aimed at disrupting an election function at the behest of the loser of that function it beggars belief to whitewash the event with just “demonstration” and “trespassing.”
An incompetent insurrection carried out for the spectacle of pleasing the narcissistic instigator of it is an insurrection nonetheless.
One thing I don't see mentioned in 50+ comments is how big a Trump fan John Malone is.
He, personally, contributed $250m to the 2016 inaugural ball plus lots money to get him elected in 16 and 20
I predict that by 2024 CNN will be objectively favoring Trump.
I has already started in more subtle ways. firing Stelter is just the latest.
CNN can't come out too strong right away or they lose their existing fascist audience. So expect more stories of the "trump isn't really so bad" /"the Trump presidency accomplished some good things" /"funny clip of dementia Joe" variety.
John LGBTQ+ Henry
Profits Slump at CNN as Ratings Plummet
The network is on a pace to drop below $1 billion in profit this year
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/08/02/business/media/cnn-profit-chris-licht.html
John LGBTQ+ Henry
I remember when conservatives were America first and would have opposed this sort of outright foreign ownership of our media and meddling in American affairs."
They are US citizens. Before writing your diatribe you could have looked that up.
Re: John Malone's sway on how CNN operates. The data is a little dirty, but it looks like he might own about 10 million shares out of around 2 billion shares that float. That's about a half of one percent ownership share. I see he's a member of the board, but not the chair and there are a dozen others. Also, he's in his 80's.
So, it's really hard to see how he has much pull he'd have or why he'd want it, or why others would let the happen.
. . . . just saying, that not really how it works.
Yes, Tater filled a time slot and worked cheap. CNN does not get its revenue from ads. It is all cable fees."
If only a Republican Congress would unbundle cable and let the subscriber chose what channels they want. The Left doesn't want to pay for Fox and I don't want to pay for the MSM including the over the air broadcasters on cable. A win-win!
Ann Althouse said...
To me, "the X resistance" calls to mind the French Resistance. These were the French and they were resisting the Nazis. To use the term "the Trump resistance" to mean the people who are resisting Trump would be like thinking the French Resistance is a way to refer to the Nazis."
For most of the war the French didn't resist too much unlike unlike Yugoslavia and others. But we need not go back to WW2. Just compare the so-call Trump resistance to the actual resistance currently going on in Russian occupied Ukraine. The so-called Trump resisters would soil their pants if they had to go up against Putin's forces and his mercenaries.
Hpudding,
You do realize that all the killings we're done by the government, right?
Remember, whatever these so-called journalist say about Republicans and Democrats should be inverted to reach the truth. Democrats are not defenders of the 1A; if they were, they would denounce political correctness and left-wing activists who pile on anyone not left-wing. When a Democrat does something stupid, it's not the stupidity, but "Republicans pounce on Democrat's stupidity."
Democrat project their faults onto Republicans. When they say Donald Trump is a fascist, they mean they are fascists. The very core concept of fascism is "mandatory." and strong-arm tactics are required to enforce what they say is mandatory because not everyone will agree. Joe Biden's and Jay Inslee's COVID shot requirements are fascist: get the jab, or lose your job.
The Democrat Party has morphed into the second coming of the Italian Fascist Party.
exhelodrvr1: "Hpudding,
You do realize that all the killings we're done by the government, right?"
Of course he/she/xe does. That's why he/she/xe worded it in such a strange and vague way. Give hpudding another 5 minutes and I'll bet he/she/xe will come back with the debunked Officer Sicknick was beaten to death with a fire extinguisher!!
Recall that our very own gadfly pushed that one for weeks and weeks and long after the truth came out that it was all a lie, not a single Althouse lefty has admitted it.
Because that's how the Althouse lefties roll.
"Unhinged Trump and Trumper bashing no longer paying the bills"
Done and dusted.
Trump-baiting, race-baiting, too, bears a sexual allusion to masturbating.
...and actually have journalists, which would be unique and refreshing.'"
Is someone actually saying CNN didn't have journalists?
Remember, I experienced the 2011 siege of the Wisconsin capitol. It’s bad but it’s not the end of democracy.
I'm old enough to remember when CNN was a respected news source. A lawyer from my old firm left to join the 1st Amendment dept. of CNN -- the whole idea was that CNN would report the news truthfully, regardless of who didn't like it.
Do you remember Alan Jackson's song about 9/11:
I'm just a singer of simple songs
I'm not a real political man
I watch CNN
But I'm not sure I can tell you
The difference in Iraq and Iran
But I know Jesus and I talk to God
And I remember this from when I was young
Faith, hope and love are some good things He gave us
And the greatest is love
Is that kind of CNN still a viable business model?
Maybe. Maybe not. Remember ABC is owned by Disney. What hope is left?
A theory going around: CNN got rid of Stelter not to make changes, but to not make changes. The theory is that letting Stelter go gets John Malone off their backs and lets the station go on as usual.
I'll be wishing Brian Potatohead (no relation) all the best as he endeavors to learn to code.
I cannot get my head around the Democrat Party as "committed to defending First Amendment freedoms." What's that based on? It doesn't resonate with me
"1st Amendment freedoms" probably excludes vaguely defined "hate speech", among other things.
"Defending" it may be in the manner of John Howard Lawson (Communist, one of the Hollywood Ten): "You believe in freedom of speech for communists because what they say is true. You do not believe in freedom of speech for fascists because what they say is a lie. "
An incompetent insurrection carried out for the spectacle of pleasing the narcissistic instigator of it is an insurrection nonetheless.
But the response of the Biden/Garland DOJ has been very efficient. Sort of like the Gestapo or the KGB. We don't have executions yet but I'll bet the Garland stasi is wishing for the word.
"...the Democratic Party—the only major party committed to defending First Amendment freedoms..."
I image a syllogism like this.
First amendment = freedom of the press
the press = journalists
journalism = MSM
MSM = Democrat interests
==> first amendment freedom = Democrat interests
You expect journalists to be able to write coherently? Such standards!
You expect journalists to be able to write coherently? Such standards!
I don't watch television news either. Visit a website, read the articles, filter out the nonsense and move on. I get a general idea of the facts without being stressed by all the angst and b.s.
"I cannot get my head around the Democrat Party as "committed to defending First Amendment freedoms." What's that based on?
It's how they want to see themselves - as the 'heroes'. Their worldview is very simple - they're the good guys, and everyone who disagrees with them are the bad guys.
And there are just so, so very many bad people out there, who must be silenced before their wrong thinking can destroy the country. Their burden is great, their responsibility terribly heavy. But they will make the sacrifice - even if it destroys the country.
And they just don't understand why we don't see them as the heroes they are, and venerate them accordingly.
/sarc - slightly.
My own personal thought transition on the Democrat party started in '92-'93 - when I saw the Clintons attempt to turn themselves into a version of American royalty. I really believe that they would have gladly established themselves as such. The media was still reporting in a 'nominally' even manner, though - and there was enough dislike for what they were doing that they toned it down a lot. And he wasn't a -bad= President after that - he at least knew what he didn't know.
Since then, I've seen the Democratic party succumb to pride and envy and a self-serving greed. They don't concern themselves with the good of the country - for most of them it's about status. Pelosi is way beyond what would be a normal retirement date, and the rest of the Democratic Leadership is, to be kind, ancient and/or barely functional.
And we're supposed to believe they're the best qualified - cognitively, ethically, morally, and spiritually - to run the country. That's what they've been telling us now for a long time.
I guess I've never been much of a 'team player' when it comes to politics. I look at what a politician promises - and then what they do. If they don't even attempt half-heartedly to keep them, that's it for my support. If what they do I think is actively destructive, that's it. And the Democrats have done a LOT worse on those aspects than the Republicans.
Promises mean nothing. High-sounding rhetoric means nothing. Results matter - but there's far too many people who believe in team loyalty over results. It's part of their core identity, and they won't change it come hell or high water... normally.
But we're heading into 'interesting' times - and people who trusted in the Democrats to 'help' them are finding out those promises were hollow. Enough of that - and they'll start to look a lot harder at the Democrats. After all, if you can't trust someone who will promise them the moon and the stars (but never attempt to deliver)... who can you trust?
Do you really believe it was an insurrection?
Based on the charges, it could more properly be described as a "parade".
Why do you (when you profess to never watch news shows) use the pronoun "we" with the antecedent "viewers?" Are you trying to imply that you are a spokesperson for "us?"
What is "the jet stream of the Democratic Party"? The jet streams are high velocity winds in the upper atmosphere. A secondary definition is the hot gases emerging from the rear of a jet engine.
In either case, either high winds or hot gases are involved.
Post a Comment