New York Times Focuses On New Narrative (statistics, Canada, speech)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It was Russia, Russia, Russia for over two years. Then as soon as Mueller's testimony was a big nothing-burger, they switched to racism/white supremacy.
Now you hear that phrase literally dozens of times per day.
My 10yo son remarked that the "news sure does like to say that word a lot". Good grief.
your son is right. 10 year olds can see through this verbal diarrhea.
Trump has pushed a lot of alarm bells. He works very hard still at pushing them. Every few days, he tweets out more alarm over something. But there's always something else happening somewhere that Trump hasn't anything to do with, too. As always, there is always going to be something that will, and should, worry us.
But a lot of that worrisome stuff doesn't need weeks and months of concern and fear. Most of it will pass fairly quickly if it is allowed to pass.
The problem with alarm bells is they all have to stop ringing at some time.
Once the place is evacuated, all the alarm bells ringing won't ever put out the fire in the building. Once the building is aflame, the alarms are worse than useless if they distract us from putting out the fire.
I think the entire media, whether pro-Trump or not, has become conditioned like Pavolov's dog.
Once any new thing arises that is alarming, it's always the next thing that takes over the news cycle, whether it starts with Trump or whether it comes from somewhere else entirely. And then, it goes on for weeks and weeks non-stop.
It makes no difference at all to the news media. They'll salivate no matter what the source of the bait is, no matter where it comes from.
They all have to turn down their sensitivity meters, forget taking sides, and behave more rationally and responsibly, I believe.
But I don't expect it to ever happen.
All news is all about making money, and it has been ever since cable news showed news reporting was profitable.
When there's money to be made by alarm, they'll always be the first to exploit the alarm.
The only way they will quit is if we quit them first, and they feel the economic pain of pusing the button so much.
Racism is the foundation since they discussed and rejected outlawing slavery in the Constitution Convention of 1786. It was not until the 13th Amendment that slavery was outlawed. It was implicitly allowed. That is what the staffer was referring to.
So what were the Founders supposed to do about slavery and form a nation large enough to stave off Spain, England, and France? How would 6 or 7 colonies survived surrounded by Europe's largest powers? The Founders were able to insert the outlaw of the slave trade 1807 or so.
The former colonies were free to join the union in the 1780s, the US needed as many states as it could get to survive; and not just the former 13 colonies were permitted to join the US but only the former 13 colonies adopted the Constitution.
The Founders are just that, the Founders of a nation, good and bad. The Founders knew slavery was doomed in the future. How slavery would end eventually was unknown at the time; we know it was the Civil War that eventually led to its demise.
The NY Times staffer needs to take a course in american history and constitutional history in particular.
Exactly what people were saying in early 2008. It was all "the liberal media is creating a recession so that the Dems win the election."
Ah yes, early 2008, when soon to be President, Hillary Clinton was the front-runner, but the Democratic "Party for Women'' would soon turn its back on her for a smooth talking Chicago pol...lol...and then focus on her fat as*, her shrillness, and likeability, all before eventually labeling her and Bubba as, of course, ''racists''.
Poor Hillary, the most qualified 2008 Dem let alone a women had to take the deal that she would take the Presidency in 2016...lol...''smart'' Hillary didn't realize that smooth Barry Obama was a huckster that would result in Donald J Trump being President.
No one was saying the ''liberal media is creating a recession'' in early 2008, we were in one...the real Depression didn't hit until coincidentally Sept 2008, so my memory of that period was watching leading and most qualified Dem Hillary Clinton crash-n-burn, the first time.
They've been ordered to drop that and now focus on hating on White Males. Hating 9/10ths of the United States. And using the the words Racism and "White Nationalism" in every article. Soros and Carlos Slim have send it down.
Even the dead fish don't want to be wrapped in that rag these days.
Much of the media now is comprised of activist disguised as Journalist. The media back in the day was more objective and had a purpose, too hold the fire to the feet of people in charge. Now they've simply shifted from that into a propaganda wing of the Dem party.
The job of the New York Times is to sell newspapers. Suck it up.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.