Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

Reports of protests are overblown. A few incidents around the country, but nothing major.

5 (45.5%)

A few major incidents in capitals, but nothing much in DC.

5 (45.5%)

A major incident in DC, but nothing much around the country.

0 (0%)

More than 10 capitals have major upheavals, but nothing much in DC.

0 (0%)

A major incident in DC plus more than 10 capitals with significant upheavals.

1 (9.1%)

More than half the capitals around the country have problems with protesters, but DC is quiet.

0 (0%)

DC has major problems, while more than half the capitals around the country also have considerable trouble with protesters.

0 (0%)

Huge disruption to the day.

0 (0%)

Total Members Voted: 9

Voting closed: January 19, 2021, 10:49:21 PM

[Echo4]

Tom Cotton is a miserable human being... and that is giving him the benefit of the doubt.



https://www.forbes.com/sites/andrewsolender/2020/07/23/sen-tom-cotton-introduces-bill-to-prevent-schools-from-teaching-1619-project/#268336c456f1

He is, but it's just a grandstanding gesture on his part.

[facilitatorn]

Tom Cotton is a miserable human being... and that is giving him the benefit of the doubt.



https://www.forbes.com/sites/andrewsolender/2020/07/23/sen-tom-cotton-introduces-bill-to-prevent-schools-from-teaching-1619-project/#268336c456f1

He left the military to avoid a well earned fragging and found a job with much much lower standards that he still doesn’t live up to. Tom Cotton is the kind of burden our society doesn’t need.

[Echo4]

[Hamilton Samuels]

The WSJ Editorial Staff responds:

I saw it, thanks.  It is a more revealing letter than I think the WSJ Editorial Staff intended, in its clearly partisan mischaracterization of the WSJ staff's concerns, and the insults it levels at its own people.

All while doing nothing to address the concerns expressed, namely the lack of proper fact-checking, and a better separation between news and opinion.

The WSJ is no more or less partisan than its competitors, nor likely does it treat its employees drastically different than at NYT and WaPo or LAT.

It's the news BUSINESS, one must remember.

The problem, to paraphrase the late Daniel Patrick Moynihan, is the WSJ Editorial page is entitled to its own opinion but not its own facts.

If you say so. But if you think they are alone with that circumstance, well...

[Hamilton Samuels]

 https://www.marketwatch.com/story/its-a-tax-on-being-black-in-this-country-5-ways-racism-is-embedded-in-the-housing-industry-2020-07-24?mod=newsviewer_click

‘It’s a tax on being Black in this country’ — 5 ways racism is embedded in the housing industry

Of course, MarketWatch is owned by the same people who own WSJ, so the story may be inaccurate.

Who knows?

[facilitatorn]

http://www.theweek.com/speedreads/927263/virginia-high-school-named-robert-e-lee-renamed-honor-rep-john-lewis

[Hamilton Samuels]

https://www.nbcboston.com/news/coronavirus/vermont-gov-to-give-coronavirus-update/216504

Vermont is imposing a mask mandate as of August 1st.

So is MICKEY DEE'S: https://finance.yahoo.com/news/mcdonalds-will-require-all-us-customers-to-wear-masks-173055321.html

[Hamilton Samuels]

Didn't see anyone here post about this, and apologies if someone did:

https://www.cnn.com/2020/07/22/us/charles-evers-brother-of-medgar-evers-dies/index.html

Was that because he supported Trump? https://www.natchezdemocrat.com/2020/07/22/video-charles-evers-discusses-civil-rights-black-lives-matter-movement-and-why-he-supported-president-trump/

You have to take the good with the bad, you know. It's only fair.

[NeedsAdjustments]

The WSJ is no more or less partisan than its competitors

I know this is your shtick, UNO, but I'll just point out that this is provably false (I know of no other editorial dept that would use a derogatory term to describe Americans too poor to pay income tax) and the Editorial Board's response letter is part of that proof.

It was defensive, preening and leans into partisan bullshit like that line about "pro­gres­sive can­cel cul­ture" because its employees asked that they employ better fact checking in the section.

No more or less partisan than its competitors?

To quote kiidcarter8:  Bonk!!

[facilitatorn]

When Red was on about the whiteness of Portland, he may have been referring to the klanness of Oregon generally and it’s effect on the composition and behavior of Portland cops who predominantly live outside the city they police. 

http://slate.com/news-and-politics/2020/07/portland-dhs-federal-police-history.html

If you are white and support the klan, it may be easy to mistakenly conflate whites and klan members.

[bodiddley]

I think it's good to ask yourself why you are giving money to Starbucks or Home Depot instead of a local merchant (if possible) or one more allied with your values.
On a national scale, why give our money to China or Saudi Arabia.

As for consumerism, a real problem is that kids are subjected to the marketing blizzard at a very young age, and it is very effective on them (to the annoyance of parents everywhere).  But when you grow up in such an environment, it becomes normalized and it can be hard to shake or look at critically.  One of the genius areas in America is marketing, making things sound impressive and desirable, and that you are worse off without whatever item they are touting.

One of my favorite examples, there's a German cereal called Chocolumpus with some generic cartoon animal on the packaging.  It looks like someone whipped that whole concept and ad campaign up in one afternoon on their own.   It's almost like admitting that's it's just cereal and not that important.  In the US, it's Count Chocula, or Frosted Flakes with Tony the Tiger, who has his own catchphrase and almost seems like an old friend by now.

[Hamilton Samuels]

The WSJ is no more or less partisan than its competitors

I know this is your shtick, UNO, but I'll just point out that this is provably false (I know of no other editorial dept that would use a derogatory term to describe Americans too poor to pay income tax) and the Editorial Board's response letter is part of that proof.

It was defensive, preening and leans into partisan bullshit like that line about "pro­gres­sive can­cel cul­ture" because its employees asked that they employ better fact checking in the section.

No more or less partisan than its competitors?

To quote kiidcarter8:  Bonk!!

Yes. No more or less.

[LarryBnDC]

The WSJ Editorial Staff responds:

I saw it, thanks.  It is a more revealing letter than I think the WSJ Editorial Staff intended, in its clearly partisan mischaracterization of the WSJ staff's concerns, and the insults it levels at its own people.

All while doing nothing to address the concerns expressed, namely the lack of proper fact-checking, and a better separation between news and opinion.

The WSJ is no more or less partisan than its competitors, nor likely does it treat its employees drastically different than at NYT and WaPo or LAT.

It's the news BUSINESS, one must remember.

The problem, to paraphrase the late Daniel Patrick Moynihan, is the WSJ Editorial page is entitled to its own opinion but not its own facts.

If you say so. But if you think they are alone with that circumstance, well...

The Wall Street Journal Editorial page is and has been as ridiculously partisan as it’s business and news division have been fact driven.

[Echo4]

The WSJ Editorial Staff responds:

I saw it, thanks.  It is a more revealing letter than I think the WSJ Editorial Staff intended, in its clearly partisan mischaracterization of the WSJ staff's concerns, and the insults it levels at its own people.

All while doing nothing to address the concerns expressed, namely the lack of proper fact-checking, and a better separation between news and opinion.

The WSJ is no more or less partisan than its competitors, nor likely does it treat its employees drastically different than at NYT and WaPo or LAT.

It's the news BUSINESS, one must remember.

The problem, to paraphrase the late Daniel Patrick Moynihan, is the WSJ Editorial page is entitled to its own opinion but not its own facts.

If you say so. But if you think they are alone with that circumstance, well...

Do you (a) think everybody is equally culpable? (b) think that even if everybody is equally culpable, that when the staff at one objects, that an appropriate response is to say, "but what about them?!"

[Echo4]

Didn't see anyone here post about this, and apologies if someone did:

https://www.cnn.com/2020/07/22/us/charles-evers-brother-of-medgar-evers-dies/index.html

Was that because he supported Trump? https://www.natchezdemocrat.com/2020/07/22/video-charles-evers-discusses-civil-rights-black-lives-matter-movement-and-why-he-supported-president-trump/

You have to take the good with the bad, you know. It's only fair.

I had no idea who he supported nor that he died.

Thank you for the post.

And yes, it is nice that you provided good, now and then, to go with the bad.

;-)