Former New York Times editor Adam Rubenstein has a lengthy essay at The Atlantic that pulls back the curtain on the newspaper and its alleged bias in its coverage. The essay follows similar pieces from former editors and writers that range from Bari Weiss to Rubenstein’s former colleague James Bennet. The essay describes a similar work environment where even his passing reference to liking Chik-Fil-A sandwiches led to a condemnation of shocked colleagues.
An opinion-section editor, Rubenstein was involved in the controversy over publishing Sen. Tom Cotton’s (R., Ark.) op-ed where he argued for the possible use of national guard to quell violent riots around the White House.
It was one of the lowest points in the history of modern American journalism. Cotton was calling for the use of the troops to restore order in Washington after days of rioting around the White House. While Congress would “call in the troops” six months later to quell the rioting at the Capitol on January 6th, New York Times reporters and columnists called the column historically inaccurate and politically inciteful. Reporters insisted that Cotton was even endangering them by suggesting the use of troops and insisted that the newspaper cannot feature people who advocate political violence. One year later, the New York Times published a column by an academic who had previously declared that there is nothing wrong with murdering conservatives and Republicans.
Rubenstein noted:
On January 6, 2021, few people at The New York Times remarked on the fact that liberals were cheering on the deployment of National Guardsmen to stop rioting at the Capitol Building in Washington, D.C., the very thing Tom Cotton had advocated.
Instead, he describes an environment in which the staff routinely rejected conservative viewpoints, subjected conservatives to added demands and editing, and faced staff opposition to working on such pieces. He noted:
Being a conservative—or at least being considered one—at the Times was a strange experience. I often found myself asking questions like “Doesn’t all of this talk of ‘voter suppression’ on the left sound similar to charges of ‘voter fraud’ on the right?” only to realize how unwelcome such questions were. By asking, I’d revealed that I wasn’t on the same team as my colleagues, that I didn’t accept as an article of faith the liberal premise that voter suppression was a grave threat to liberal democracy while voter fraud was entirely fake news.
Or take the Hunter Biden laptop story: Was it truly “unsubstantiated,” as the paper kept saying? At the time, it had been substantiated, however unusually, by Rudy Giuliani. Many of my colleagues were clearly worried that lending credence to the laptop story could hurt the electoral prospects of Joe Biden and the Democrats. But starting from a place of party politics and assessing how a particular story could affect an election isn’t journalism. Nor is a vague unease with difficult subjects. “The state of Israel makes me very uncomfortable,” a colleague once told me. This was something I was used to hearing from young progressives on college campuses, but not at work.
What emerges from the interview is all-too-familiar to many of us on this blog.I have long been a critic of what I called “advocacy journalism” as it began to emerge in journalism schools. These schools encourage students to use their “lived expertise” and to “leave[] neutrality behind.” Instead, of neutrality, they are pushing “solidarity [as] ‘a commitment to social justice that translates into action.’”
For example, we previously discussed the release of the results of interviews with over 75 media leaders by former executive editor for The Washington Post Leonard Downie Jr. and former CBS News President Andrew Heyward. They concluded that objectivity is now considered reactionary and even harmful. Emilio Garcia-Ruiz, editor-in-chief at the San Francisco Chronicle said it plainly: “Objectivity has got to go.”
Saying that “Objectivity has got to go” is, of course, liberating. You can dispense with the necessities of neutrality and balance. You can cater to your “base” like columnists and opinion writers. Sharing the opposing view is now dismissed as “bothsidesism.” Done. No need to give credence to opposing views. It is a familiar reality for those of us in higher education, which has been increasingly intolerant of opposing or dissenting views.
Downie recounted how news leaders today
“believe that pursuing objectivity can lead to false balance or misleading “bothsidesism” in covering stories about race, the treatment of women, LGBTQ+ rights, income inequality, climate change and many other subjects. And, in today’s diversifying newsrooms, they feel it negates many of their own identities, life experiences and cultural contexts, keeping them from pursuing truth in their work.”
There was a time when all journalists shared a common “identity” as professionals who were able to separate their own bias and values from the reporting of the news.
Now, objectivity is virtually synonymous with prejudice. Kathleen Carroll, former executive editor at the Associated Press declared “It’s objective by whose standard? … That standard seems to be White, educated, and fairly wealthy.”
In an interview with The Stanford Daily, Stanford journalism professor, Ted Glasser, insisted that journalism needed to “free itself from this notion of objectivity to develop a sense of social justice.” He rejected the notion that journalism is based on objectivity and said that he views “journalists as activists because journalism at its best — and indeed history at its best — is all about morality.” Thus, “Journalists need to be overt and candid advocates for social justice, and it’s hard to do that under the constraints of objectivity.”
Lauren Wolfe, the fired freelance editor for the New York Times, has not only gone public to defend her pro-Biden tweet but published a piece titled “I’m a Biased Journalist and I’m Okay With That.”
Former New York Times writer (and now Howard University Journalism Professor) Nikole Hannah-Jones is a leading voice for advocacy journalism.
Indeed, Hannah-Jones has declared “all journalism is activism.”
It is easy to see how this was a “strange experience” for Rubenstein. He objects that “our goal was supposed to be journalistic, rather than activist,” but he found reporters actively working to advance the political interests of the Democrats and Joe Biden.
It was a strange, not a unique, experience. It is another account of the orthodoxy of American media, which increasingly functions like a de facto state media.
In his description of the sandwich controversy, Rubenstein describes how he was introduced to the culture of the New York Times at his orientation meeting. When asked about his favorite sandwich in the group meeting, he committed the offense of naming Chick-fil-A’s spicy chicken sandwich.
That led to a shocked hush before the rep leading the orientation said: “We don’t do that here. They hate gay people.” That statement was met with the snapping of fingers from the staff in agreement in a communal condemnation.
It is clear from the account that, at the Times and other major outlets, there is much of traditional journalism that they “don’t do . . . here.”
The major media outlet Turley works for, Fox News, paid $787 million to Dominion for making false claims about the 2020 election. Fox News also faces a $2 billion defamation lawsuit from Smartmatic for making other false claims about the 2020 election.
But to Turley’s credit, last week Fox News host Neil Cavuto cut away from a speech Trump was giving to fact check several false claims Trump was making. Cavuto said: “The former President is entitled to his opinions; he’s not entitled to his own set of facts.”
Of course, conservatives attacked MSNBC & CNN for cutting away from Trump’s speech for the same reason Neil Cavuto gave.
Not hard to guess why anything involving Trump’s attorney, Giuliani, is deemed to be unsubstantiated until the evidence can be provided to major media outlets & thoroughly verified. Giuliani was convicted & fined $146 million for pushing false narratives about the 2020 election & 2 Georgia election workers. Giuliani continues to claim he has “scientific proof” the 2020 election was stolen.
Funny side note about bothsidesisms. The National Enquirer’s parent company, AMI, paid $150,000 in hush money to Stormy Daniels & Karen McDougal to stop their stories from being reported & damaging Trump’s 2016 campaign. AMI admitted that its principal purpose in making the payment was to suppress the woman’s story to prevent it from influencing the 2016 election.
Not a good day for the NYT. More bias, and questionable reporting.
@Floyd,
Meh.
Its par for the course.
Activist journalists will lay in bed with Nazis if it can help further their agenda.
Nothing new
-G
LMAO That anti semitic vid posted should be ignored – it doesn’t reflect well on the chosen and their rabid psychos here.
TELL US MORE LIES WE CANNOT EVER BELIEVE.
The problem is, she did not appear to vet the story. Which means, should evidence arise later, she has already poisoned the well. Not just for that sort of activity, but any other stories about Hamas’s terrorism.
Gumby, it is not just journalists but even many of our CEOs of major companies. IBM ran computers and printed the data cards that made possible the rapid extermination of Jews, gypsies and many others—in addition to his other payments, Watson, CEO of IBM, got a percentage.
That is why the NY Times and so many other papers are dying and journalism is considered dead. Objectivity is not a race based thing. There are independent facts. If you want to be an opinion columnist, have it at. But a journalist needs to provide the facts so the reader is informed and can make decisions. No one wants or needs these activists to tell them what or how to think. Hearing some of these ‘journalists’ shows that they themselves often do far too little thinking, never considering the ramifications of their positions, whether or not their position is sound/reasonable or even if its based in reality.
communist revolution walk through the institutions
I couldn’t watch much of today’s hearing, screen irritated my eyes for some reason, but Mark Levin did watch and has posted his impressions:
https://twitter.com/marklevinshow/status/1762605126387138651
Nonverbal behavior can offer clues as to honesty or evasion. It is useful to watch testimony.
𝐖𝐡𝐞𝐧 𝐖𝐢𝐥𝐥 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐀𝐭𝐥𝐚𝐧𝐭𝐢𝐜 𝐀𝐩𝐨𝐥𝐨𝐠𝐢𝐳𝐞 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐈𝐭𝐬 𝐎𝐰𝐧 𝐁𝐞𝐡𝐚𝐯𝐢𝐨𝐫?
In the Atlantic, Adam Rubenstein relates 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐬𝐭𝐨𝐫𝐲* of his terrible treatment by the New York Times, which, back in 2020, made his continued employment essentially impossible after he committed the grave journalistic crime of helping commission a piece by Senator Tom Cotton for the opinion page. Some of the tale’s details have to be read to be believed. …
By: Charles C. W. Cooke ~ February 27, 2024
https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/when-will-the-atlantic-apologize-for-its-own-behavior/
*Ref: The Story
𝐈 𝐖𝐚𝐬 𝐚 𝐇𝐞𝐫𝐞𝐭𝐢𝐜 𝐚𝐭 𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐍𝐞𝐰 𝐘𝐨𝐫𝐤 𝐓𝐢𝐦𝐞𝐬
I did what I was hired to do, and I paid for it.
By Adam Rubenstein ~ February 26, 2024
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2024/02/tom-cotton-new-york-times/677546/
I used to subscribe to the Atlantic. I stopped years ago when they went totally stupid. Not the dumbest stuff I read. That honor belongs to another magazine. But dumb and slanted enough to cancel my subscription.
𝐓𝐢𝐜𝐤𝐥𝐞𝐫 𝐅𝐢𝐥𝐞: 𝐇𝐮𝐧𝐭𝐞𝐫 𝐁𝐢𝐝𝐞𝐧 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐉𝐚𝐦𝐞𝐬 𝐁𝐢𝐝𝐞𝐧 𝐝𝐞𝐩𝐨𝐬𝐢𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐬 𝐅𝐞𝐛𝐫𝐮𝐚𝐫𝐲 𝟐𝟖, 𝟐𝟎𝟐𝟒
—
𝐉𝐚𝐦𝐞𝐬 𝐁𝐢𝐝𝐞𝐧 𝐭𝐞𝐬𝐭𝐢𝐟𝐲𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐢𝐧 𝐇𝐨𝐮𝐬𝐞 𝐆𝐎𝐏 𝐢𝐦𝐩𝐞𝐚𝐜𝐡𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐢𝐧𝐪𝐮𝐢𝐫𝐲 President Biden’s brother, James Biden, is testifying Wednesday in a closed-door interview with the House Oversight and Judiciary committees as part of their impeachment probe into the president.
By: Erin Doherty ~ Feb 21, 2024
https://www.axios.com/2024/02/21/james-biden-impeachment-inquiry-testimony
𝐇𝐨𝐰 𝐇𝐮𝐧𝐭𝐞𝐫 𝐁𝐢𝐝𝐞𝐧’𝐬 𝐜𝐨𝐧𝐠𝐫𝐞𝐬𝐬𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐚𝐥 𝐝𝐞𝐩𝐨𝐬𝐢𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐰𝐢𝐥𝐥 𝐛𝐞 𝐝𝐢𝐟𝐟𝐞𝐫𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐟𝐫𝐨𝐦 𝐨𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐫 𝐢𝐦𝐩𝐞𝐚𝐜𝐡𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐢𝐧𝐪𝐮𝐢𝐫𝐲 𝐢𝐧𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐯𝐢𝐞𝐰𝐬 For months, Hunter Biden said he would only testify before Congress if it was in public. But on Wednesday, President Joe Biden’s son will go behind closed doors to face off with his Republican detractors on Capitol Hill for a deposition. The interview came together after months of public sniping, political stunts, the threat of criminal contempt and hardball negotiations that resulted in two key concessions from Republicans – that the deposition will not be filmed and that the transcript will be released quickly to the public, sources familiar with the talks told CNN.
By: Paula Reid, Annie Grayer and Jeremy Herb, CNN – February 27th 2024
https://www.weny.com/story/50502290/how-hunter-bidens-congressional-deposition-will-be-different-from-other-impeachment-inquiry-interviews
Turley Rags On NYT While Avoiding Real Isses
At the same time that they are professing support for IVF, dozens of congressional Republicans have signed onto so-called personhood legislation with no carve-out for embryos in clinics, which, if enacted, would upend how the procedure is practiced in the United States.
Many conservatives are torn between their desire to help parents deal with infertility and their belief in fetal personhood, and have struggled over the last week to articulate exactly which laws and policies should govern this fraught area of health care.
https://www.politico.com/news/2024/02/27/republicans-alabama-ivf-ruling-00143391
……………………………
Today Turley once again presents himself as this very high-minded academic disgusted by the New York Times’ liberal bias. Turley, of course, would never be so one-sided. ..Not..!!
One of the biggest issues this past week has been the Alabama Supreme Court ruling that frozen embryos are real people. This development has spread panic amongst millions of aspiring mothers; including Republicans!
The backlash has been intense. Donald Trump quickly announced that he’s fine with IFV procedures. Yet 125 House Republicans had already pledged to support personhood for the unborn. In fact, the Alabama justices thought they were ‘leading’ the personhood movement!
So now Republicans are caught in an “Aw sh!t” moment where they realize they’ve gone further right than their own base. And even Trump has ditched them! This brings us back to Professor Turley.
Professor Turley, we keep learning, can’t deal with issues like this until Fox New producers decide what the network’s position is. So instead, Professor Turley bravely attacks the New York Times for their inability to empathize with Trumpers.
Wait, so your argument is that Professor Turley has no business pointing out how biased the NY Times is unless he also covers a different topic that has nothing to do with media bias?
That is exactly what he/she/it is saying. Pure, unadulterated puerile distraction. That seems to be a common tactic of the shills. Either paid to do this, or mentally ill as all get out. Funny and sad at the same time.
“Turley Rags On NYT While Avoiding Real Isses”
~+~
It is understandable, if not excusable, that a person’s mind would selectively use the word Rag/Rags when mentioning the New York Times, regardless of context. The association might be at a subconscious yet powerful level.
Good Point D.
My Law School had a weekly call “The Rag” (Univ. of Toledo, OH)
Always a treat to write for the Law Student’s publication.
@Floyd got to correct that for you
That’s she/he/it or shit for short.
oldmanfromkansas posted:
so your argument is that Professor Turley has no business pointing out how biased the NY Times
Given the multiple posts today by cowardly Anonymous Soviet Democrats that claim that Professor Turley is an employee of Fox News, it would appear that this cowardly Anonymous Soviet Democrat has been dispatched here not to debate. But instead, to attempt to make people believe Professor Turley actually IS an employee of Fox. Which would be the complete opposite of their relationship: Fox News is one of many CUSTOMERS of Professor Turley’s, one who buys the right to publish some of his op-ed pieces. And in most cases, Fox and other customers publishing the same opinion piece.
Other media outlets who are also customers of Turley’s include The Hill, USA Today, Huffington Post, etc. It isn’t for the purpose of debate or argument that this cowardly Anonymous Soviet Democrat ignores those Soviet Democrat propaganda arms that support Bribery Biden and the Soviet Democrats, to instead claim Professor Turley only gets a paycheque because he’s an employee of Fox News.
Rhetorical question: do you have to be stupid, a liar – or both (or a Soviet Democrat apparatchik… but I repeat myself) – to claim that Professor Turley is an employee of Fox News?
And that Fox News allows their employee Professor Turley to also write op-ed articles for the Soviet Democrats propaganda media like The Hill, the Huffington Post, etc who are their competitors?
Florida State Senator Withdraws Backdoor To Personhood Bill
https://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/florida-lawmaker-pulls-bill-wrongful-death-unborn-children-107602239
you talk of “many conservatives”, and “dozens of Republicans”
And manage to name three. Haley, Grahm, and Tubberville, who have voiced support of the idea person hood. I too support the concept. Details to be determined as legislation is crafted. This is as natural as spring following winter. Going from unrestricted abortion up to and including birth, it is natural for the pendulum will swing, and it too will swing to far the other way.
Another cowardly Anonymous Soviet Democrat liar dispatched here by The New York Times attempted this:
Turley Rags On NYT While Avoiding Real Isses… Professor Turley, we keep learning, can’t deal with issues like this until Fox New producers decide what the network’s position is.
This has to be the same cowardly Anonymous Soviet Democrat who has continually posted all day that Mr. Turley is employed by Fox. Is this cowardly Anonymous Soviet Democrat unaware that The Hill, USA Today, the Huffington Post, etc also purchase and publish Turley’s columns?
Does this Soviet Democrat childishly believe that Fox News just loans Turley to these competitors of theirs to write columns for them?
If it ain’t “BUBUBUUUTTTT…. MUH TRUMP!”, the Soviet Democrat apparatchik lie of the day is “BUBUBUUUUTTTTT…. MUH FOX NEWS!”.
And then the cowardly Anonymous Soviet Democrat apparatchik cites… Politico! That other bastion of independent reporting!
Why can’t the Soviet Democrats and their propaganda arms at CNN, The Hill, the NYT at least send us a more entertaining bunch of Soviet Democrat Apparatchiks and serial liars to post here in defense of Bribery Biden and the Soviet Democrats?
It’s none of your concern, it is about making babies not murdering them for your blood cult of racism.
Dear Prof Turley,
Don’t believe a word I read in the NYT anymore .. . unless, of course, it’s true.
The NYT is one of those few U.S. publishers left with the historical award-winning prestige and resources necessary to actually print informative, well-sourced and timely stories. .. for all the wrong reasons.
That was pretty revealing. Never thought I’d see the day when (a) the NY Times becomes a propaganda tool for the CIA, (b) liberals love the CIA and approve of its covert activities undermining democracy around the world, and (c) liberals are thrilled about lining the pockets of arms merchants and the continuation of pointless forever wars. But alas, that’s where we are here in clown world.
OT
Catholic and other NGOs are, and have been for a very long time, surreptitiously facilitating the deleterious illegal alien invaders, among them murderers, drug dealers, security assets, and terrorists.
OT: re: fani willis.. Judge McAfee has ruled no attorney-client privilege between Wade and Bradley for purposes of its assertion to prevent Bradley from testifying last week or whenever it was. Bradley on the stand now, very prepped and defensive…
Looks like Bradley’s testimony was pretty useless for Merchant.
He was “speculating” about the relationship between Willis and Wade. He “doesn’t recall any specific dates.” He “do[es] not have knowledge of it starting, or when it started.”
Why would they put him on the stand? Really poor lawyering.
. . . .He “do[es] not have knowledge of it starting, or when it started. . . .”
And the judge, (the finder of fact) is not buying his weaseling.
His text message pinpoints a date. His Testimony today, claims the date was mere speculation, but “can’t remember” what led to the speculation. These. Are. The. Worst. Lawyers. EVER.
Naw, not the worst.
The issue is that they don’t know how to lie under oath without it seeming like a lie or something that would put them into legal jeopardy.
(Although that is the lawyer today, Willis and Wade are toast for their earlier testimony.)
Speaking of worst…
I met this guy in the dog park… he started a conversation about Chicago and IL gun laws.
He said a few things wrong… and he interrupts me by saying “… but I’m a lawyer. I know the law better than you…”
Now the funny thing is that I happen to know these laws and the changes made when IL crafted the CCW bill.
But I gave him the benefit of the doubt and also didn’t want to really talk to the guy.
Went home. Verified the facts and I was right.
But hey, he’s a lawyer who doesn’t know the laws he was talking about.
In Chicago. That’s par for the course.
-G
Thank you, lin….I appreciate the update!
Merchant was not very effective, but Sedov, Trump’s lawyer, was. He demolished Bradley’s testimony that he “speculated” to Merchant about when the relationship started (long before Willis hired Wade). When asked why he would do that instead of just saying he didn’t know, Bradley said “I have no answer.” To which Sedov said that’s because he wasn’t speculating, but doesn’t want to admit in court that he knew because Wade told him. Devastating.
Sorry, it was Sadow, not Sedov.
LMAO “Lev Lvovich Sedov was the first son of the Soviet communist leader Leon Trotsky and his second wife Natalia Sedova”
Born into a wealthy Jewish family in Yanovka in what was then the Russian Empire, Trotsky …
https://www.jewishgen.org/Belarus/misc/JewishEncycRussia/s/index.html
NP It’s just jew on the brain, Daniel.
OT: The Biden Administration hates children
1)Biden showers with daughter and sniffs the hair of other people’s daughters
2)Thousands of children are dying in the desert
3)Over 100,000 deaths from overdoses, mostly young.
4)”Twenty-two state attorneys general said Monday more than 85,000 migrant children could be lost based on a report from the Department of Health and Human Services.
The report issued this month shows many of the children could be in the labor market or sex trafficked, they said in a letter.
https://justthenews.com/nation/states/center-square/state-attorneys-general-say-more-85000-children-lost-border?utm_source=daily&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=newsletter
Have they murdered 86,500 gaza children yet, in their self defense ?
LAMO SHOVE IT
Shakdi, in times of risk, real men place their women and children behind them for protection. In your world, things are backward. Women and children are placed in front of the men to use as shields protecting you and your kind. We have a difference of opinion as to what it means to be a man.
Tomorrow, there would be peace if Gazan leaders desired it. But they prefer to kill their own and turn their young children into bombers, preferring them dead if they can blow up other children.
Enjoy your life of killing your own, Shakdi. I prefer to live in peace.
You’re a mentally ill liar, and your excuse is a joke. The world is turning against your lies. Good luck.
Ziek Heil concentration camp nazi man.
Shakdi, all the world knows you and your kind are cowards using children as shields to protect themselves. That is quite obvious from the films we see and the Hamas-produced films of your type killing babies and mutilating women.
Admit it. You are a savage.
I don’t read the NY times, or the Washington Post – both papers are too biased in their reporting. I no longer consider either paper to be a credible source, on politics anyway. They are really more like CNN and MSNBC these days, media outlets that do what I would describe as comic book version of journalism. I got a kick out of Jonathan mentioning the SF Chronicle and the editors pronouncement that objective reporting is dead. I grew up reading the Chronicle, it was a fun, witty, irreverent paper, not afraid – at all – at taking on the establishment. In recent years the Chronicle has morphed into this boring politically correct rag that completely supports the Democratic establishment, which has run San Francisco into the ground with it’s kooky left wing politics. Sadly, the SF Chronicle is no longer fun to read, the paper just defends the Democratic establishment, even though the Democrats in California have become a corrupt party, financed by by high tech moguls, a party that no longer believes in free speech, civil rights, safe streets, etc. etc.
@(good?)Anon
I am another one that used to get the Sunday Times and enjoy it years ago. Every week. I *dropped* it years ago. I sure wish more of us had been paying attention in opposition to our feelings of being ‘cultured’ those years and years ago. There has not been anything civilized about these papers for some time. It had been a slow creep, but it blasted out like a hurricane in 2016. Some of this was hubris on *our* part, wanting to feel like we were part of the Hoi Polloi. There is nothing inherently sophisticated in any of that nonsense just because a whole lot of people live in Manhattan or LA.
Woke and privileged (and largely white) children took over these institutions when it became apparent that legacy media could not compete with the blogosphere years ago; they hired the inflammatory and purely ignorant people from the digital space to do the work that used to occupy real journalists in their idiotic quest for relevancy. This was the *real* affect of that paradigm shift. And as soon as people figured out that clicks = dollars, it was over for news, for blogs, for social media, and then when it was clear you could manipulate entire societies in this fashion – forget it. Web 2.0 Silicon Valley (i.e. Zuckerberg etc., the ‘unicorn’ years) were so brain dead and narcissistic this was the only possible and inevitable result of their actions which were 100% contrary to actual human nature.
This doesn’t not surprise me in the slightest, my wife and I saw it on California school boards ten years ago; in spite of plenty of people sounding the alarm, nobody cared at the time, so here we are. That we are now dominated by rich, white, and supremely ignorant children is pretty much on us. We have multiple lost generations on our hands, and that means double time for the rest of us that want to fix things. You’d better be up for it, because due to a great many’s personal ennui and lackadaisical thinking – that is what it is going to take. It will not be pleasant, at first. If you are sick of the Hunter Bidens of the world, then stop caring more about who Taylor Swift kissed or who’s butt is the biggest and most naked on Instagram and start caring more about how you are raising your kids and how you are going to vote.
*whose
EGREGIOUS CIVILITY RULE VIOLATION HERE
BAN FOR LIFE
“Being a conservative—or at least being considered one—at the Times was a strange experience.”
– Former New York Times editor Adam Rubenstein
_______________________________________________________
Is it possible to use “conservative” as a pejorative in the United States of America?
The American Revolutionaries and Founders conducted insurrection, a violent overthrow of and secession from the British government, and implemented a severely restricted-vote republic under the title of “democracy.”
Turnout was 11.6%, and voter qualifications were male, European, 21, with 50 lbs. Sterling or 50 acres in 1788.
The Founders engendered and implemented a corpus juris, fundamental law, that provided maximal freedom to citizens while severely limiting and restricting government.
Immigration was restricted to “…free white person(s)….”
Central planning, control of the means of production (i.e. unconstitutional regulation), redistribution of wealth, and social engineering were utterly prohibited.
Governmental participation in or regulation of industry and charity was utterly prohibited.
You don’t suppose the American Founders were conservatives, do you?
You don’t suppose America is conservative by thesis and law, do you?
America has been invaded by parasites seeking “free stuff” and “free status” who are adamantly opposed to conducting and perpetuating the American thesis of freedom and self-reliance.
America must be placed in reverse, delivered from liberal collectivist enslavement, and returned to conservative freedom.
OT, the FBI’s amazingly skilled profilers have concluded that the major threat of organized retail theft is coming from petite wealthy white women in their 20s. And just to think I believed my lying eyes whenever I saw news footage of people perpetrating smash-and-grabs who were not petite wealthy white women in their 20s. So glad the FBI and its crack team of experts is there to set me straight.
https://www.outkick.com/culture/fbi-stealing-retail-theft-picture-reaction
That was hilarious! Especially the comments!
I find the discussion of Voter supression vs voter fraud hillarious.
First – the left is and has been actively engaged in voter supression for a long long long time.
Worse still they are actively engaged in unconstitutional and illegal voter supresion that is also election fraud.
That is what political censorship by govenrment is – unconstitutional and illegal voter supression and election fraud.
When not done by government – it is STILL voter supression – it is just not unconstitutional and illegal – though it is morally wrong. And it is election fraud in the non-criminal sense.
One the fraud side:
Democrats have alleged voter fraud when it suits for my entire lifetime.
I can cite far more instances of democrats claiming Fraud than republicans.
There is nothing wrong with claiming fraud.
The price for making false claims is paid in lost credibility – not jail time. Not for the left, not for the right.
Regardless the solution to allegations of election fraud is threefold.
First conduct elections in a transparent way. Show EVERYTHING short of exactly how each individual voter voted.
Transparency creates trust.
Next conduct real inquiry into allegations of fraud – again sunlight is the best disinfectant.
Finally, actually conduct elections in a fashion that fraud is difficult or impossible.
Conducting elections securely is NOT just a question of proven fraud.
All the election integrity measures that those on the left hate are more about creating trust in the results of the election than anything else.
Within limits fraud, voter supression, outside influence, DO NOT MATTER.
What matters is TRUST.
If a substantial portion fo the electorate does not trust an election – the govenrment is illegitmate.
At some point trust gets low enough you will have actual insurrection, revolution or even just the suddent peaceful abrupt collapse of government as we saw with the USSR in 1989.
The ultimate measure of journalism is trust.
The ultimate measure of government is trust.
The ultimate measure of the free market is trust.
The ultimate measure of objectivity is trust.
The reason that we do not lie is because when we damage trust, we reduce our future choices.
When you commit crimes it is harder to get a job – it is SUPPOSED to be that way. Rebuilding trust is very hard work.
When you lie, you destroy trust.
When you are accused of lying that is an effort to undermine the trust others place in you.
The ultimate determination of whether something is true or false, is not fact checks, it is whether people trust it over the long run.
The harping on “voter suppression” by Democrats starts with their 18-year-old age restriction. Even Democrats impose restrictions. Individuals impose self-restriction by simply not voting. 34% self-restricted in 2020 and 51% self-restricted in 2018. Restrictions began with the Founders implementing a completely justifiable age restriction of 21. Of course, restricting by allegiance, vesting, accomplishment, independence, net worth, participation, etc., is rational and valid. Restrictions are absolutely necessary and have existed in “democracy” since its inception in Greece. One-man, one-vote “democracy” produces the “dictatorship of the proletariat” of Karl Marx. It is more difficult to experience people voting for constitutional American freedom and simpler to experience people voting for the “free stuff” and “free status” of communism, both of which are unconstitutional, that is, welfare and affirmative action—to include all variants.
All the news that fits… the radical Wokester bias.
What is objective ?
That is ultimately determined by people in all contexts.
The left is ultimately correct that everything is subjective.
What they are VERY wrong about is that just because “objectivity” is subjective, does not mean that all views, all claims, all … are equal.
They are obviously not.
There is a dramatic decline int he trust of the MSM, and that decline results in declining revenue, layoffs, closures and bankruptcies.
They people are speaking. The MSM’s approach to journalism does not meet their needs.
It does not match their views of objective.
It does not work.
“While Joe Biden was vice president, the Bidens developed a business partnership with a Chinese tycoon named Ye Jianming, the chairman of CEFC China Energy Co., which had strong ties to the Chinese Communist Party. Throughout Ye’s relationship with the Bidens, he “showered” some members of the Biden family with money, Schweizer reported. Hunter Biden received a three-carat diamond worth $80,000; and in July 2017, Ye’s company gave the Bidens a $5 million, interest-free, forgivable loan.
Furthermore, by July 2017, CEFC began making interest-free, forgivable loans to the Biden family. CEFC executive Zhao Running wrote that $5 million was intended as money lent to the BD family,” not just Hunter Biden.
“This $5 million loan to the BD [Biden] family is interest free,” Zhao wrote.
Schweizer notes that “interest-free loans provide tremendous leverage because the lender can demand its money back if it is displeased by any action.”
Hunter spoke to Ye on a “regular basis” and Ye helped Hunter “on a number of his personal issues” including unspecified “sensitive things,” Hunter explained in emails. Joe Biden also attended a meeting with Hunter, additional business partners, and Ye, Hunter’s business partner Rob Walker told U.S. House of Representative investigators in 2023. “I don’t remember the exact time, but I remember being in Washington, DC, and the former vice president stopped by. We were having lunch,” Walker testified.”
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2024/02/27/blood-money-how-the-biden-family-bagged-5m-from-business-partner-of-white-wolf-chinese-criminal-gang-leader-who-helped-create-the-fentanyl-pipeline-decimating-ame/
How many Americans have been killed by Fentanyl streaming in at the southern border?
Edward – Americans die so that the Bidens can get ever more wealthy. One piece of good news is that in your fair state Trump is actually now leading Biden.
https://emersoncollegepolling.com/michigan-2024-poll-trump-46-biden-44/
I don’t see dennis gigi or fishwings responding and declaring there is not one single bit of evidence the bidens have done anything wrong ?
Did they all die suddenly, because I know they all took the jabs.