It's nice to know that some things don't change at the WashPost
Remember that time in 2016 when the Washington Post ran 16 negative stories on Bernie Sanders in 16 Hours?
Washington Post coverage of Bernie Sanders over the past 24 hours alone: see if you can spot an agenda. pic.twitter.com/4Dsnn4ZPEV
— Adam H. Johnson (@adamjohnsonNYC) March 8, 2016
So what did the WashPost do when they were called out for their bias? They defended it.
To give you an idea of how heavy the negative bias was at the WashPost and how much of an effect it had, look at this NYPost article.
The Bernie Sanders candidacy didn’t die a natural death — it was murdered. And the murder weapon has the fingerprints of the Washington Post all over it.
That’s the contention of the much-respected progressive writer Thomas Frank (author of the beloved-by-the-left book “What’s the Matter With Kansas?”) in an evisceration of the media’s role in taking down Sanders that will be the cover story of the November issue of Harper’s.
Frank went through every one of hundreds of opinion pieces published in the Washington Post on Sanders and Hillary Clinton, his rival for the Democratic nomination for president, during primary season, from January to May 2016, and found a stark disparity in coverage. Sanders pieces took a negative tone by a ratio of 5 to 1, whereas opinion pieces on Clinton were about evenly split between favorable and unfavorable.
...Frank cites headlines that ran over opinion pieces that said things like, “NOMINATING SANDERS WOULD BE INSANE” (days before the Iowa caucuses) and “A CAMPAIGN FULL OF FICTION” (the same week). Columnist Charles Lane ridiculed Sanders for suggesting that he was fighting against “the billionaire class” that largely seems comfortable with a Hillary Clinton presidency while other writers castigated Sanders for lacking a serious plan to tackle the deficit (as though Hillary Clinton has one either).
With that in mind, how do you think the Washington Post has covered the new Sanders campaign in the 24 hours since his announcement yesterday?
At this point can the Washington Post even be considered journalism? Or is it more like the print edition of DKos?
Comments
Things not changing
It only takes two words to explain this: Jeff Bezos
Jeff Bezos is the owner of the WaPo. End of story.
"Freedom is something that dies unless it's used." --Hunter S. Thompson
Sanders camp even mentions Amazon...
Sanders campaign even mentions Amazon in their first 2020 tv ad...
[video:https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=1&v=ZgJagAiHimk]
"Freedom is something that dies unless it's used." --Hunter S. Thompson
I'm guessing that, as with Trump,
the institutional perfidy and entrenched corruption predated Bezos' presence; as with Trump, Bezos has done a smashing job of revealing it.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
@Cant Stop the Macedonian Signal Bezos has been at
Bezos has been at Amazon...
since day 1. So, in this instance--at least as far as Amazon's concerned--he created, "nurtured" and owns the company's entire, messed-up culture. In other words, he IS Amazon.
"Freedom is something that dies unless it's used." --Hunter S. Thompson
I was referring to his time at the Washington Post.
I knew Bezos was at Amazon from day 1. At this point, I suspect Amazon itself of being a CIA op., designed to reorganize our economy in a way more pleasing to the elites.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
Posted Adam Johnson/FAIR.org piece on this WaPo crap...
...over "there" in May 2016. Johnson is/was the editor-in-chief of FAIR.org:
Washington Post Squeezes Four Anti-Sanders Stories
Out of One Tax Study Over Seven Hours (5/11/16)
It's estimated that Amazon Web Services has grossed a minimum of at least a couple of BILLION dollars from the CIA's budget, alone, to manage a large chunk of that Agency's I.T. services over the past few years; never mind the other U.S. government agencies that AWS services!
Then again, Bezos is building his new (Amazon) HQ2 just down the road from the Pentagon and the CIA, as we speak! I mean: Where else would the wealthiest person in the world take control of a town in this country, other than its capital? Let's get real here, folks!
They might as well rename it Bezos (freakin') City!!! Maybe put his picture on the American flag, while we're at it!
"Freedom is something that dies unless it's used." --Hunter S. Thompson
A big security hole.
One would think that a spy agency would have it's own IT services.
I posted once on warship design and how it appears the designers never thought their ships would see combat, so it was all just for the profit.
Apparently, the spy agencies feel their only real adversary is the American public,
I've seen lots of changes. What doesn't change is people. Same old hairless apes.
All of the top I.T. firms have relationships with...
U.S. intelligence services. In fact, companies like Palantir (and many others) are actually partially owned by intelligence-services-related entities; not to mention that they flat-out own In-Q-Tel, a major venture capital/private equity firm.
Google is yet another example.
Here's a list of 14 "cutting edge" I.T. firms at least partially owned by the CIA.
'nough said?
"Freedom is something that dies unless it's used." --Hunter S. Thompson
Gasp! Socialism!
I've seen lots of changes. What doesn't change is people. Same old hairless apes.
Ahhh...the juicy irony of your two-word comment!
I love it!
"Freedom is something that dies unless it's used." --Hunter S. Thompson
Have you seen Captain America: Winter Soldier?
Those targets being acquired by the software are people who could present a present or future threat to national security. As you notice, the initial algorithm selects many hundreds of thousands of "threats" to kill.
Captain America uploads a more accurate algorithm.
I think this script accounts for Cap's transformation, in later movies, into an enemy of the state. Unfortunately, after that development, Captain America t-shirts started popping up everywhere, after which Cap was rewritten, in the comics, as always having been a Hydra agent.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
Who is not an adversary?
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
I don't have proof
but I believe Bezos to be a CIA asset, which makes the placement of his new digs quite appropriate.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
The CEOs of the top I.T. firms based in the U.S...
...are, at least to some extent, government assets, in general. This is a highly-documented fact of life in this country. See my comment, above.
"Freedom is something that dies unless it's used." --Hunter S. Thompson
Just bullshit for when they cheat again...
They can point to all the articles before hand and say "SEE, he never had a chance, we all knew it, shut up and vote for Hillary or else Trump wins."
Two years later, and it's like all the cheating, lying and general garbage didn't happen. Because as far as the MSM is concerned, it didn't happen.
They see only the threat of Heresy... and that has only one response.
[video:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KmqgRAXygDg]
I do not pretend I know what I do not know.
Idolator!
I've seen lots of changes. What doesn't change is people. Same old hairless apes.
Everyone knew that the usual suspects would octuple
down on the same kind of anti-Sanders/pro-anointee crap they did/used in 2014-16 primary season, plus come up with new anti-Sanders/pro-anointee crap.
What I want to know: What has the Sanders campaign done differently this time so far and what is it planning to do differently going forward?
(frequently mis-attributed to Einstein)
I'd like to know how Bernie is justifying
Asking for our money in the ABSENCE of not addressing the fraudulent election of 2016.
There is always Music amongst the trees in the Garden, but our hearts must be very quiet to hear it. ~ Minnie Aumonier
I don't care if he doesn't verbally address it, given the
position our lovely courts took. However, I very much care about what, if anything, is being done differently this time to avoid the result we got last time.
I surely don't know what they plan, . . .
. . . as I'm not in communication with the campaign, but there is a way to bypass all of the hurdles. Even to turn those hurdles into assets.
In 2016, with just as little coverage, Bernie drew tens of thousands of people to his rallies. It was the story of the campaign, along with the $27 donations. That was when Bernie was "unknown."
Now he's known, indisputably known, and the reaction is stronger, if that first day of fundraising is any measure. And now as well, Bernie's campaign has mailing lists they did not have in early 2016.
As for the Washington Post, et al., the solution is to shame them. Not because that would change what they do, but because it will change what the audience does. Use those mailing lists, or an ad buy that $6million will more than cover, to broadcast the message
I say this genuinely and in good faith
But we shouldn't have to be in direct communication with the campaign to be assured that our contributions to their campaign along with our votes will not be subverted by the same electoral fraud we saw in 2016.
I also do not think it's unreasonable for us to require an explanation from Sanders campaign as how they will ensure our votes will be counted if they are asking for our money.
There is always Music amongst the trees in the Garden, but our hearts must be very quiet to hear it. ~ Minnie Aumonier
Oh, I get this, really.
I don't think Sanders has much control over whether he's going to get cheated again, and if that's a deal-breaker for you, then hold onto your money.
I also am not convinced that playing in any rigged game, such as the American political arena, makes much sense, but I'm not going to insist or even try to coax anyone else to forsake voting, nor do I think anyone else should.
Everyone needs to read what he or she reads in the tea leaves that are in that cup in front of us, and make whatever choices of action or inaction one deems right for those they care about. Not what's right for them, but what's right for the least among us.
My comments here about strategy are only the observations of someone who's seen a race or two, and took notes.
I appreciate your response
Sometimes knowing you're being heard helps disarm the defensiveness that goes with the cynicism left over from 2016. But as I said to gjohnsit upthread, we are a family here after all and basically want the same things in the end. Seems counterproductive to be at cross purposes with our own allies.
Still, it is quite a pickle we progressives find ourselves in, isn't it?
There is always Music amongst the trees in the Garden, but our hearts must be very quiet to hear it. ~ Minnie Aumonier
And if what I wrote sounds . . .
. . . like what Trump did, it's because that's very much what he did. It's a basic thing. People, at least people who have any other choice, don't vote for the person who preaches at them "We'll never, ever have single-payer" or "We're capitalists, and that's just the way it is." They will vote for the person who identifies with the voter, who feels what they feel (or in Trump's case, claims to, when his opponent could never credibly claim that). To win, you don't tell the voter what to think or do; you join the voter to fight for what's best for that voter. It's so basic that the most inappropriate and improbable candidate to make that argument -- Trump -- won with it. For Bernie, who's always been doing this, it's what galvanized those crowds in 2016.
The character of identifying the opposition would be different. It wouldn't be Trump's lying liberal media ganged up against white workers; it would be conspiratorial corporate 0.01%-er media holding down all workers, all the powerless, all the minorities, all the future generations who think America should be theirs, too.
I have a partial answer
Bernie 2019 is a national brand with a nationwide campaign structure and a national track record, unlike 2015. Those are huge differences.
As for going forward, I don't know. We'll see.
Shouldn't that be addressed
Before Bernie asks us for money?
There is always Music amongst the trees in the Garden, but our hearts must be very quiet to hear it. ~ Minnie Aumonier
Here's the problem.
It can't be addressed, because it can't be admitted. Bernie can't possibly state in public that the Democratic party in general, and the Clintons and their allies in particular, cheated him, even in the presence of blatant evidence of same. To state such things would be political suicide. Neither the Clintons nor either party nor the media can be criticized in such a manner if one wants to stay in the mainstream.
For that matter, there is a cultural amnesia about the two fraudulent Bush "elections," even on places like the Jimmy Dore show. People talk about Democrats voting for Bush, the absurdity and perfidy of the electoral college, etc., all of which are important issues, but neither of which is the reason Bush "won."
You can't talk in the mainstream about election fraud unless you're raving about Russia.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
Thank you, but that doesn't address my question.
Elsewhere on this board, I noted that, this time, at least people will not be asking "Who is Bernie Sanders?" That was my shorthand way of saying he has made huge inroads on the name recognition issue, which is another way of saying what you are saying. So, I know that is something different from 2014-16.
However, the national brand difference exists because Bernie ran last time and has remained visible and vocal since last time. It is not anything the 2020 Sanders campaign did to counter the unfairness that media, the DNC and the state parties wrought last time. I am among those who believe that, but for that unfairness (which includes so many kinds of behaviors) Bernie would have been the nominee last time, despite the initial near absence of recognition. So, unless all that unfairness is addressed this time, I see the same outcome as last time.
Not if you close your eyes and tap your ruby slippers 3x
There is always Music amongst the trees in the Garden, but our hearts must be very quiet to hear it. ~ Minnie Aumonier
Ah, so that's what happened last time! I clicked my heels
only once (also volunteered, donated a bundle of my own money and raised over $15,000 from others, but it was that damn two-click deficiency that handed the 2016 primary victory to Hillary).
I sympathize and understand completely about
the investment you and many others put into something we all believed in only to watch a corrupt political system silence our constitutional rights to be heard. My Sister and I campaigned for Bernie here in California as well as working within our communities to raise money for Bernie's campaign.
To date, the State of California still has not counted my vote for Bernie.
Perhaps it's a failing in me personally that I am unable to forget the injustice of 2016 and saddle up for another round of electoral fraud in an effort to show solidarity with those who believe we must keep trying. I'd probably be a lot more popular if I could.
There is always Music amongst the trees in the Garden, but our hearts must be very quiet to hear it. ~ Minnie Aumonier
I can totally understand that
And if there was another game in town, I'd be for ditching this train wreck.
But there isn't another realistic party/political system.
So we're left with making the best of a bad situation, or giving up and letting it roll over you.
Thank you for your reply
I think for the first time I understand a little better why you and others are still fighting. I can and do respect that.
In sympathy, I think in the future my comments, even if I disagree, will reflect that respect. My apologies if in the past I have been less than charitable in my response to your sentiments.
We are, after all, a family on this blog and want the same things. Doesn't make sense to be, as JtC has often said, intolerant of dissenting views how we will get there.
There is always Music amongst the trees in the Garden, but our hearts must be very quiet to hear it. ~ Minnie Aumonier
Well put.
I'm going to try to do the same.
I'm also among the disillusioned and disenfranchised former Bernie supporters who gave hundreds of dollars I couldn't afford, volunteered at campaign HQ, and did everything I personally could to educate others about his platform.
After 2016, I can't stomach going through it again. It's a weird contradiction for me: I am honestly uplifted, all over again, by his candidacy, his message, and his enthusiastic grassroots support. But I just can't support this corrupt duopoly of ours. I can't give Bernie any more of my money, or my vote, knowing the DNC can basically rob it of him, and us. Not to mention the rest of it.
I do understand that this is my own position and I won't try to force it on anyone.
However, I'm also discouraged (as Big Al has pointed out) by the fact that the horse-race will now suck all of the air out of any chance to meaningfully reform our political system.
Maybe it simply doesn't matter. Forty percent of the world's insects are about to go extinct. We have 12 years 'til climate disaster and -- without meaningful political change -- that's not getting addressed. So we may as well enjoy what we can, huh?
(So much for staying positive ... sigh).
In most respects I feel as you do
I cannot even read about what is happening with climate change because it terrifies me so. I am not proud of that but merely mention it because I wanted to respond in kind to your own honesty about participating/not participating in the electoral process.
I am still terribly bitter and cynical about the entire political process and often express that cynicism sarcastically and combatively. But it's going to be a long election cycle, and after having a few of these go rounds with divineorder, I honestly regret I wasn't more gracious with his sincerity. I dunno. I'm still sorting things out on that account. I know I'm not going to be participating in this election, but I also know that's a decision I'm making through the filter of a life time of my own experiences. So how come I can't allow others their own filter without it threatening my own? Well, the answer is I can. So in that way, I am beginning to understand why people feel completely DIFFERENT than I do about the best way forward.
More importantly, I've invested many years discussing, learning, disagreeing, and laughing alongside many people here when we were all over at TOP. And frankly, those personal experiences outweigh the overall argument about participating or not participating (and why in Gods name would anyone feel compelled to participate after 2016!?!) I can do nothing about.
Thank you so much for your honesty. You encouraged me to be honest too.
In solidarity.
There is always Music amongst the trees in the Garden, but our hearts must be very quiet to hear it. ~ Minnie Aumonier
Solidarity, all.
You're right; human connections should trump all else.
Love Trumps Hate.
(And by the way, Hill, we all know you stole that from Bernie. Like everything else.)
I so appreciate all of the many honest, and respectful, discussions that happen here.
[Edited because my original title referenced a gender binary I don't personally subscribe to. But old language habits die hard, apparently].
Hold onto your memory, zoe.
I'm still fighting to keep the memory of Bush's frauds alive.
Funny how a political culture so concerned about racism could forget the 21st-century update of Jim Crow.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
Nothing can be done about the media bias
Literally nothing. At least not without enforcing anti-trust laws.
But a couple things have happened about the DNC: super-delegate reform and push toward grassroots fundraising.
Well for one thing ...
Voters in California know that they shouldn't register as independents because then they can only vote for some Independent Party that no one knew existed.
And for another, young voters in Iowa and Nevada know the rules now.
When you have been cheated, you can grump about it and sit in the corner and sulk. Or you can vow revenge. I know what I pick. YMMV.
I've seen lots of changes. What doesn't change is people. Same old hairless apes.
Characterizing our response as "sulking" is interesting.
Revenge would be great, but unless you know any top-notch coders with a deep understanding of our electoral system, the major players who manipulate it, and the security they have to keep it under their control, I'm not sure how you're going to get revenge. And if you do know people like that, you shouldn't talk about it here!
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
No personal offense intended.
I was actually thinking of the usual reactions of two of my grandsons.
I've seen lots of changes. What doesn't change is people. Same old hairless apes.
No problem. :-)
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
As we watch a repeat of 2016
I'll be interested to hear how the outcome this time will be different.
There is always Music amongst the trees in the Garden, but our hearts must be very quiet to hear it. ~ Minnie Aumonier
Nancy Pelosi
will be surrounded by even more police, and very afraid of Bernie Bros when she hears a chair go clunk. Then there's Debbi Wassermann Schultz being even more Wassermann Schultzy. We know who the enemies are this time. So does Bernie. Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice...etc.
Actually, Bernie is making different, very shrewd moves...
...this time around. For starters, he has someone (highly-respected) from Pelosi's staff running his campaign.
If you want to win in this country, you have no choice but to play the game. And, when it comes to Bernie, who's about as steadfast in his beliefs as it will ever get in this twisted country, I'm OK with this. And, no, he's NOT a sell-out. He's doing what he needs to do to WIN this time around, as he himself has noted in the past few days. As far as I'm concerned, I'm OK with that. As for all of you puritans out there, well that's your choice to make; or, rant about. But, reiterating, I have yet to know of any successful politician in this country that's held to their beliefs and been more consistent about them as Bernie Sanders. THAT, in and of itself, is highly admirable, to say the least! (And, it's one of the main reasons why I'm vociferously behind his candidacy!)
"Freedom is something that dies unless it's used." --Hunter S. Thompson
Yes, he's certainly aware of the 2016 chicanery
As are many more activists now. It will be more difficult to gloss over now despite MSM efforts. More eyes on the process and more ways to make end-runs against media black-outs.
I believe that Senator Sanders' call for "an unprecedented grassroots campaign of 1 million active volunteers, in every state in our country" is a big part of his plans to meet disinformation and cheating head on. He will have a list of connected and informed activists to implement the "Bernie Rapid Response" strategy.
So my expectation is that he isn't "rolling over" but has a good pro-active plan to anticipate and counter such moves.
Not to beat a dead horse (as they say)--
and, not speaking to print media coverage, I can assure folks that Bernie was anything but blacked out of Cable News media during the 2016 election cycle.
No candidate that I know of had anywhere near the face time that he enjoyed--except for DT, before he fell out of favor, and quit giving interviews (except with Fox). That would include regularly appearing as a Guest on all of the Cable news, and major broadcast network political shows on Sundays. (We listen to all of them in replay on C-Span Radio Channel, beginning at 11:00 a.m. every Sunday.) Heck, at times, I posted links to the transcripts from these interviews, usually at EB.
We're also C-Span junkies, and heard many, if not all, of his rallies--on replay, if not live, on the C-Span XM radio channel. And, we watched [online] every Republican Party Presidential debate, as well as all of the Dem Party debates.
Not sure that I'll be able to follow the coverage as closely this cycle, but, if it helps, I'll happily start posting notice of his Cable and Sunday show interviews, as I hear them, this election cycle.
Somehow, it appears that it's become an urban legend that Bernie was 'shut out' of TV coverage during the Presidential election cycle--which is absolutely balderdash.
[Not to pick on you, OT. I've seen this claim, more times than I can count. It is unfounded. I'm 'guessing' that some progressive writer put out this talking point, since so many folks appear to be convinced that this was the case.]
Blue Onyx
“I think dogs are the most amazing creatures; they give unconditional love. For me they are the role model for being alive.”
~~Gilda Radner, Comedienne
Everyone thinks they have the best dog, and none of them are wrong.
Thanks, I appreciate your response Unabashed
By referring to "black-out" I wasn't trying to make any claim about the coverage two years ago during the 2016 election. My comments reflected my thoughts on the current campaign.
What I was indicating when I wrote that was more along the lines of the selective coverage seen in the last few days with some major outlets burying news such as the amount and breadth of support the Senator received immediately upon announcing.
It's the daily, ongoing placement and other forms of editorial bias in the major outlets that I expect to be countered by an active, connected base of activists he is organizing this year. If the campaign is better at countering opposition framing that will be a big plaus.
Hey, OT--my bad. Thought you were
referring to Bernie's run in 2015/2016.
BTW, no argument out of me that, in the past, he's been on the receiving end of unfavorable/terribly biased coverage in print media. And, I imagine that many so-called mainstream journalists will have their knives sharpened for him, again.
Have a good weekend!
Mollie
“I think dogs are the most amazing creatures; they give unconditional love. For me they are the role model for being alive.”
~~Gilda Radner, Comedienne
Everyone thinks they have the best dog, and none of them are wrong.
Thanks, no offense taken
I always look forward to seeing your comments here and am happy to have the opportunity to interact.
BTW, on the topic of biased coverage -- just this AM I ran across this new Bloomberg piece:
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-02-25/fired-up-iowans-want-...
All of the following declared or prospective candidates are named in this order: Harris, Booker, Warren, Klobuchar, Brown, Gillibrand, Buttigieg, Yang, Delaney, Williamson, Bennet, Bullock, and Hickenlooper.
No mention of Sanders, Gabbard or Biden. I expect Sanders and Gabbard to be routinely "disappeared." Biden I believe they don't really expect to enter the race unless needed to clear some of the lanes.
Gosh, I feel like I've heard that before
He's got someone from Nancy Pelosi's staff, huh? Is that analogous to Obama's cabinet appointments after the financial crisis?
There is always Music amongst the trees in the Garden, but our hearts must be very quiet to hear it. ~ Minnie Aumonier
It certainly seems that way.
I think this definitively puts to bed any lingering fantasies that Bernie will do anything but play Democratic inside politics. He's not going to defect at the convention, in other words.
I also find it interesting that I'm being called a "puritan" on this site. I don't say this to incite a pie fight, but give me a freaking break. That kind of sentiment is exactly what I'd expect from the Kos Kids.
Yeah, I chose to ignore that
Along with employing the word "rant" to describe the nature of our concerns, observations, critiques, etc,.
I'll PM you to rant, er, I mean discuss further.
There is always Music amongst the trees in the Garden, but our hearts must be very quiet to hear it. ~ Minnie Aumonier
Expensive fish wrap.
But with DKos, you can't even wrap fish, so totally useless.
Gëzuar!!
from a reasonably stable genius.
Huffington post too
With a headline that doesn't really fit the article. Bernie's not for doing away with the filibuster. The headline: " Bernie whiffs on day one"
The HuffPost went the same way as DKos in 2016
and guess what?
Catch this from yesterday’s NYT?
Didn’t research the veracity of it but was on Reddit and attributed to Current Affairs, who incidentally have an excellent podcast:
https://www.reddit.com/r/ChapoTrapHouse/comments/aseij5/fuck_it_mask_off_lets_ditch_the_prestige_prose/
In another essay Hawkfish said there was no mention at all on the front page of today’s NYT about Bernie’s fundraising juggernaut kicking into gear upon his announcement yesterday.
The craven MSM is battening down the hatches early, as planned. If it continues this way maybe this’ll be the ultimate case for their final discrediting.
"If I should ever die, God forbid, let this be my epitaph:
THE ONLY PROOF HE NEEDED
FOR THE EXISTENCE OF GOD
WAS MUSIC"
- Kurt Vonnegut
Recipe for revolution.
So if we kill those three people and distribute their wealth, everyone will have twice as much.
they should be very afraid.
I've seen lots of changes. What doesn't change is people. Same old hairless apes.
Bernie will take the money and run, alright...
...all the way to a lush mansion somewhere. Hey, it worked for Ron Paul, so why not Bernie, right?
Modern education is little more than toeing the line for the capitalist pigs.
Guerrilla Liberalism won't liberate the US or the world from the iron fist of capital.
Wow
I hate to use any terminology from TOP, but you just used right-wing talking points.
Do you think the political establishment is just pretending to hate him? That this is just a scam?
I really don't want to start an argument, but extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.
Just wait until he concedes to their anointed one.
Even should he win, the capitalist pigs will do all they can to make sure any policies he proposes will never see the light of day.
If Sanders is serious this time, he damn well better challenge the fuckers in a meaningful way. Unless and until he does that, he's just a fluffer for the Democrat wing of the Capitalist Party.
Modern education is little more than toeing the line for the capitalist pigs.
Guerrilla Liberalism won't liberate the US or the world from the iron fist of capital.
To a certain extent you could be right
It would be nearly impossible for him to overturn the establishment.
But at the same time, he could still get some of those things done, and make it extremely difficult for the pigs.
I personally believe that he is authentic. He's no socialist, but he's a New Deal Democrat.
I don't see how.
Congress would never allow him to nominate or confirm anyone who isn't in the pocket of capitalist interests. Hell, they wouldn't even hold any kind of hearing for Merrick Garland, and he was on their side.
If he really wanted to make things difficult he'd call for a nation-wide general strike. Something like that would hit the capitalist interests where it hurts.
Modern education is little more than toeing the line for the capitalist pigs.
Guerrilla Liberalism won't liberate the US or the world from the iron fist of capital.
There's little evidence that Bernie's behavior
is motivated by greed. If you're a DC politician and you want the bucks, challenging Hillary in any way, shape or form is not the way to get them.
There's actual evidence that Bernie's behavior arose in response to threats. Few people like that interpretation of his behavior, and mentioning it generally elicits anger both from Bernie supporters and Bernie detractors, but it is one of the few explanations for which we have fairly solid corroborating evidence.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
Wasn't he roughed up just before the 2016 convention
by Billary's goons? He certainly looked like it when he conceded the nomination so I could certainly see him being under threat from the fuckers. Be that as it may, I don't see him presenting any meaningful challenge to the party or the capitalist interests who hold them by the balls this year either.
If there's one thing this whole clusterfuck has proven, it's that electoral politics have been rendered moot by capitalist interests. Sure, they might be entertaining in some sickening reality tv sort of way but that doesn't make it useful.
Modern education is little more than toeing the line for the capitalist pigs.
Guerrilla Liberalism won't liberate the US or the world from the iron fist of capital.
I agree.
He's only a threat in the sense that they feel threatened by anybody saying anything that doesn't completely toe their line.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
Print Edition of DKOS for sure.
I've seen lots of changes. What doesn't change is people. Same old hairless apes.
For a laugh or a puke, read this
Democrats need to be wary of manipulation
Still beating the dead horse and blaming us for Her loss.
Am I conscious Russian operative or just a dupe? Or a Comsymp? Inquiring minds (and Roy Cohn) want to know!
Does anyone have the link for direct donation to Bernie?
I've seen lots of changes. What doesn't change is people. Same old hairless apes.
I think you can donate on his campaign website
This is what some people were saying yesterday.
Which AIPAC/MIC/pharma/bank bought politician are you going to vote for? Don’t be surprised when nothing changes.
Baa baa
O'Riley.
veal-meet pen.
Do I gotta list the reasons. . . ?
Ya got to be a Spirit, cain't be no Ghost. . .
Explain Bldg #7. . . still waiting. . .
If you’ve ever wondered whether you would have complied in 1930’s Germany,
Now you know. . .
sign at protest march
The Washington Post stopped being journalism
when it made a multi-hundred-thousand-dollar deal with the CIA. Thank you, Jeff Bezos, for making it perfectly clear what the Post is, and what you are.
As Jimmy Dore says, "Democracy Dies in Darkness" isn't a warning, it's a mission statement.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver