Enemy of the People

#101
#101
By hiring an anti-white, anti-male writer the Trump-hating hypocrites at the New York Times just handed the moral high ground to the man they loathe most

Imagine if I tweeted that I wished to ‘cancel black people’?

Or boasted: ‘It’s kind of sick how much joy I get out of being cruel to old black men.’
Or spoke of ‘dumbass f***ing black people marking up the internet like dogs p*ssing on fire hydrants.’
Now imagine me also tweeting ‘all women must die’, ‘all women are equally garbage in my eyes’ and ‘all women are trash that will never be loved.’

How long do you think I would stay in my job as Editor-at-Large of DailyMail.com - one second or two?

I mean, no journalist in their right mind, given the current hyper politically-correct climate world we live in, would even contemplate behaving in such a manner?


Yet that is exactly what Sarah Jeong, a well-known Asian writer at The Verge, did.
And rather than being fired, Ms Jeong has just been HIRED by the New York Times to be their new star tech writer.

For the same New York Times has led the charge in constantly berating and attacking President Trump for racist, misogynist and abusive rhetoric.

Yet here it is hiring someone who when it comes to hysterical rabid racist sexist tweeting makes Trump look like a choirboy.

PIERS MORGAN: With anti-white, anti-male writer hypocrites at NYT handed moral high ground to Trump | Daily Mail Online
 
  • Like
Reactions: jacdaniels, CABVOL and BigOrangeD
#102
#102
BowlBrother85 said:
They all made misstatements and malapropisms and at times employed poor grammar. Vice President Dan Quayle's greatest hits include:

"It isn't pollution that's harming the environment. It's the impurities in our air and water that are doing it."

"It's time for the human race to enter the solar system."

"It's wonderful to be here in the great state of Chicago."

"The Holocaust was an obscene period in our nation's history. I mean in this century's history. But we all lived in this century. I didn't live in this century."

"This President is going to lead us out of this recovery."

"What a terrible thing to have lost one's mind. Or not to have a mind at all. How true that is." (he was speaking about the United Negro College Fund and totally warbling their slogan "A Mind is a Terrible Thing to Waste"

However, I have never seen any President or VP, on multiple occasions, demonstrate a complete lack of basic knowledge and never correct himself. This wasn't a misstatement or malapropism. Trump simply doesn't know the difference between England, Great Britain and the United Kingdom... even though he owns a golf course in Scotland and spends much time there and his mother was even born there. That he doesn't know England is it's own country is hard to believe.
Click to expand...
How about this Dan Quayle quote:

“Bearing babies irresponsibly is simply wrong... Failing to support children one has fathered is wrong. We must be unequivocal about this. It doesn’t help matters when prime-time TV has Murphy Brown, a character who supposedly epitomizes today’s intelligent, highly paid professional woman, mocking the importance of fathers by bearing a child alone and calling it just another lifestyle choice.”
Click to expand...
 
#103
#103
BigOrangeTrain said:
Not surprised by your response. Its a typical deflection when a well thought out argument stifles you. I am not talking about a celebrity making fun of Trumps hair. I have made fun of his hair. I am talking about the ones who have talked about killing him publicly. Or the idiots who wish the economy would tank just to get him out of office. I mean the bashing goes on and on.

Look at what Time magazine did with their cover depicting that poor little kid with Trump. Or the photos that depicted refugees sleeping in horrible conditions that occured in the Obama administration. That was used against Trump. Thats just a few examples of fake news. You can ignore it all you want but the MSM has made things up to admonish Trump.
Click to expand...
The Time cover was a symbolic criticism of the Trump "zero tolerance" policy on separating families at the border... It wasn't meant to be interpreted as a literal commentary on that child's individual circumstance. It wasn't even an actual picture. There were photos showing children in cages from the Obama era falsely described as being under Trump, but the offending media outlets did acknowledge the error and I'm pretty sure they apologized for them as well. Mistakes will happen sometimes. If you want to assign malicious intent to them, I guess you can. Remember when Fox News showed Zach Ertz of the Eagles kneeling in prayer before a game but Fox News used the picture to imply that Ertz had kneeled during the national anthem after the Eagles had declined to visit the White House in June? That's fake news as well... you can either believe that it was an honest mistake or you can assign malice to it and think they were trying to besmirch the Eagles because they had dissed Trump.
 
#104
#104
BowlBrother85 said:
There were photos showing children in cages from the Obama era falsely described as being under Trump, but the offending media outlets did acknowledge the error and I'm pretty sure they apologized for them as well.
Click to expand...

Did they apologize multiple times a day for several days on CNN's tv station? You know, as often as they broadcast the accusation that Trump was caging children?

Or was it buried in a week old article somewhere on the website?
 
  • Like
Reactions: jacdaniels and SpaceCoastVol
#105
#105
TheDeeble said:
Did they apologize multiple times a day for several days on CNN's tv station? You know, as often as they broadcast the accusation that Trump was caging children?

Or was it buried in a week old article somewhere on the website?
Click to expand...
The Trump administration was caging children... just not the children shown in those particular photos.
 
#109
#109
SLICKYINC said:
Where was the coverage of the same thing during the past administration?
Click to expand...
Like I said earlier, it's completely valid to complain about their bias. There is no question that the networks are selective of what news stories to report and what amount of emphasis should be placed on those stories based on which party it involves. That's just not "fake news". Trump both overuses and misuses that term constantly. It's become his go to line for everything unfavorable to him.
 
#110
#110
BowlBrother85 said:
Like I said earlier, it's completely valid to complain about their bias. There is no question that the networks are selective of what news stories to report and what amount of emphasis should be placed on those stories based on which party it involves. That's just not "fake news". Trump both overuses and misuses that term constantly. It's become his go to line for everything unfavorable to him.
Click to expand...

Honest question. Does it get the response he's looking for?
 
#111
#111
BowlBrother85 said:
Like I said earlier, it's completely valid to complain about their bias. There is no question that the networks are selective of what news stories to report and what amount of emphasis should be placed on those stories based on which party it involves. That's just not "fake news". Trump both overuses and misuses that term constantly. It's become his go to line for everything unfavorable to him.
Click to expand...

Bias is inherently fake because it is not evenhanded. Your personal, partisan definition from earlier is patent BS. You make biscuits from scratch, but “news” only needs one factually incorrect word to be fake.

Lay off the mouthwash, bruh.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 82_VOL_83
#112
#112
Squints said:
Bias is inherently fake because it is not evenhanded. Your personal, partisan definition from earlier is patent BS. You make biscuits from scratch, but “news” only needs one word to be factually incorrect to be fake.

Lay off the mouthwash, bruh.
Click to expand...
That is incredibly dumb. Bias doesn't have to lead to something fake. MSNBC made a choice to place great emphasis on the wasteful spending of Scott Pruitt while he was head of the EPA. That does show bias on their part but it was not fake news. Scott Pruitt really did waste a lot of tax payer money and government resources on himself and his family. What they reported was factual; they just placed a great amount of emphasis on it because they enjoyed presenting a Trump cabinet member in such a negative light.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Septic, TennTom and newarkvol
#115
#115
BowlBrother85 said:
That is incredibly dumb. Bias doesn't have to lead to something fake. MSNBC made a choice to place great emphasis on the wasteful spending of Scott Pruitt while he was head of the EPA. That does show bias on their part but it was not fake news. Scott Pruitt really did waste a lot of tax payer money and government resources on himself and his family. What they reported was factual; they just placed a great amount of emphasis on it because they enjoyed presenting a Trump cabinet member in such a negative light.
Click to expand...

Do you ever refute an entire point, or do you just pick words and phrases to parse? Who gives a damn about Scott Pruitt? How does extensive, factual coverage equate to negative bias? How many people here defended him and castigated the coverage he received?

What’s your brand of choice, Listerine® or Scope®?

That’s the problem with you libs, none of you can logically defend your shtick. I’ll give you this, though, with as many holes you fools have dug moving goal posts, Trump’s wall could’ve been built several times over by now.
 
#116
#116
Squints said:
Do you ever refute an entire point, or do you just pick words and phrases to parse? Who gives a damn about Scott Pruitt? How does extensive, factual coverage equate to negative bias? How many people here defended him and castigated the coverage he received?

What’s your brand of choice, Listerine® or Scope®?

That’s the problem with you libs, none of you can logically defend your shtick. I’ll give you this, though, with as many holes you fools have dug moving goal posts, Trump’s wall could’ve been built several times over by now.
Click to expand...
I just explained that. I used one example to show that the majority of the bias you see on television news doesn't lead to false information being reported but rather how much emphasis is placed on stories which are positive to the administration in power vs the stories which are negative. Sure, you can point to a few stories which are false but for the most part the issue of bias boils down to which stories the news networks choose to cover and which they don't.
 
#117
#117
BowlBrother85 said:
Whose argument are you trying to make? If ABC and CNN encouraged the practice of reporting false information, these people wouldn't have been fired.
Click to expand...

It’s just a smoke screen dude. Can’t figure that out on your own? It’s the 11th chromosome thing I guess.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BigOrangeD
#119
#119
BowlBrother85 said:
I just explained that. I used one example to show that the majority of the bias you see on television news doesn't lead to false information being reported but rather how much emphasis is placed on stories which are positive to the administration in power vs the stories which are negative. Sure, you can point to a few stories which are false but for the most part the issue of bias boils down to which stories the news networks choose to cover and which they don't.
Click to expand...

Did you read the FIRST LINE in my post? Take the whole argument in context and provide a rebuttal! You didn’t even answer what you made bold! All I saw was you stuttering and stammering to justify that bias isn’t fake, when “unfair” is canonical for the definition of bias. Good grief, WTH are you on? You’ve surpassed mouthwash and gone straight under the kitchen sink.

Clorox® or off-brand® bleach?
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 82_VOL_83
#120
#120
Squints said:
Did you read the FIRST LINE in my post? Take the whole argument in context and provide a rebuttal! You didn’t even answer what you made bold! All I saw was you stuttering and stammering to justify that bias isn’t fake, when “unfair” is canonical to the definition of bias. Good grief, WTH are you on? You’ve surpassed mouthwash and gone straight under the kitchen sink.

Clorox® or off-brand® bleach?
Click to expand...
A show of bias in news reporting doesn't have to be something fake. In most cases, the bias (or something unfair, as you put it) shown in news coverage involves the amount of emphasis placed on positive vs negative stories for the administration in question. The reports themselves are usually factual (not fake news). That really shouldn't be so hard to understand.
 
#122
#122
Squints said:
Did you read the FIRST LINE in my post? Take the whole argument in context and provide a rebuttal! You didn’t even answer what you made bold! All I saw was you stuttering and stammering to justify that bias isn’t fake, when “unfair” is canonical to the definition of bias. Good grief, WTH are you on? You’ve surpassed mouthwash and gone straight under the kitchen sink.

Clorox® or off-brand® bleach?
Click to expand...
You're really straining with the SAT vocabulary again, squint. It really just comes off as forced/contrived. But the anger...the anger, almost an excitable anger? --is palpable. I believe it. In the future ---and when writing for a larger audience ---go with that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TennTom and BowlBrother85
#123
#123
BowlBrother85 said:
The Time cover was a symbolic criticism of the Trump "zero tolerance" policy on separating families at the border... It wasn't meant to be interpreted as a literal commentary on that child's individual circumstance. It wasn't even an actual picture. There were photos showing children in cages from the Obama era falsely described as being under Trump, but the offending media outlets did acknowledge the error and I'm pretty sure they apologized for them as well. Mistakes will happen sometimes. If you want to assign malicious intent to them, I guess you can. Remember when Fox News showed Zach Ertz of the Eagles kneeling in prayer before a game but Fox News used the picture to imply that Ertz had kneeled during the national anthem after the Eagles had declined to visit the White House in June? That's fake news as well... you can either believe that it was an honest mistake or you can assign malice to it and think they were trying to besmirch the Eagles because they had dissed Trump.
Click to expand...

Lol you are hilarious. That Time article was specifically meant to denigrate Trump. It used photoshop to make a false claim. Thats fake news. But you are who thinks anything Trump does or says is terrible. So believe as you will.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SpaceCoastVol
#124
#124
newarkvol said:
You're really straining with the SAT vocabulary again, squint. It really just comes off as forced/contrived. But the anger...the anger, almost an excitable anger? --is palpable. I believe it. In the future ---and when writing for a larger audience ---go with that.
Click to expand...
Coming from someone who called people poorly educated by just looking at a picture. Lol.
 
#125
#125
BigOrangeTrain said:
Lol you are hilarious. That Time article was specifically meant to denigrate Trump. It used photoshop to make a false claim. Thats fake news. But you are who thinks anything Trump does or says is terrible. So believe as you will.
Click to expand...
Meme on Facebook? Fake news that shouldn't be allowed to influence people.

Meme on the cover of Time? Respected journalism that all should revere.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 82_VOL_83
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top