Florida State Seminoles

[Saint]

Hedge is really a Trump man

[Saint]

Which makes sense because buffoons like other buffoons and the associated buffoonery.

Also, glad to see eCat still in Quint mode, full-steaming the Orca into oblivion because it's too much to admit that Trump is the worst thing to ever happen to American politics. That is comforting to me.

[eCat]

read a report that unemployment is at 8.4% now which is I think pretty amazing given many places are at 50% capacity and limited resources - along with all this unrest.

You wouldn't know that people are unemployed in my neck of the woods, hiring signs everywhere for service sector/warehouse and driver jobs.

[aTm]

One can only hope that all local unemployed communists get exported to like, Portland.

[eCat]

I read a post from someone saying that Pelosi is holding up some funding package to get money to rebuild liberal city areas burned or looted by protestors.

It would be a good time to remind the Mayors of Portland and Seattle , among other cities of their statements saying they didn't need or want federal help

[Tree]

Which makes sense because buffoons like other buffoons and the associated buffoonery.

Also, glad to see eCat still in Quint mode, full-steaming the Orca into oblivion because it's too much to admit that Trump is the worst thing to ever happen to American politics. That is comforting to me.

He's not worse than Nixon. Hell not even worse than W. Granted that can change if he wins re-election, which is looking more and more likely these days. But there's a chance that Biden's neoliberal warhawking could be even worse, just like there was with Hillary. We're all F'ed in the A right now b/c however you vote, even if it's for Howie Hawkins, you're literally supporting the complete destruction of the nation.

[eCat]

Trump is totally going to go off the rails if he is re-elected. I fully expect it - no wars but whatever there will be no filters or restraint, he'll try to have the CIA kill leaders in other countries, maybe even our allies, he'll be punitive in any way he can toward those liberal mayors and governors that dogged him during the protests and refused to go with him during Covid-19, he'll greenlight spending for supporters and donors, and he is going to do some damage that we won't recover from. And at the end of the day he is still better than Democrats forcing Biden to cater to Antifa and BLM. I'm not going to vote for any party that specifically caters to promoting one demographic of people over another, and you can start in with the Trump helping white people - and you'd be wrong. I can accept someone saying they'd rather have Biden helping Antifa and BLM over *WEALTHY* White people and I can at least understand that argument. Biden is about the worst possible choice you can have to say the Old white guy on the GOP is helping wealthy people but thats another argument. But to tell me Trump is implementing policies that help all whites in general or favors whites is horseshit. There is nothing going on in the Trump presidency that is helping me personally or millions of other whites and its not about privilege. The privilege is living in this country, period.

and for the record, I totally believe that Trump called the WWI vets losers and suckers. Now in what context I don't know. That's the problem - there are so many worthless son of a bitches out there with no integrity they'll take a quote or a statement and twist it into whatever they want for their own gain - and it goes both ways, against and for Trump. Reporting is dead in America. At some point in the near future everyone is going to come to the conclusion that media is a propaganda machine. They already thing that about opposing views, but they'll come around - and if Biden is elected and sticks to his guns on immigration, defunding police and the like, they'll turn on him too

For example, I can see Trump saying we were suckers for going into that war, or we recruited some losers back then - and then it becomes a blanket statement about our military.
Then I saw a widely circulated tweet on social media about a woman - a Biden supporter watching a retired Marine take down his Trump sign in disgust. You don't know that is true, hell it doesn't even have to be true, its the sentiment that Biden supporters want to read and with social media it can reach 8 million people in a weeks time. People will read it and not even question whether this is true. What is the cost of putting something like that on social media? Is anyone really going to track this person down and ask her what is the name of her retired marine neighbor?

The Atlantic has been down on Trump from day 1 and runs a story with "unnamed sources"? You're going to tell me Mattis or Kelly aren't man enough to put their name with a quote like that? Sorry, try again when you are a real journalist or your story is up there with the twitter retired marine

[Jungle Rat]

Why does Trump hate soldiers KIA?

[10ac]

Bolton, who was there and despises Trump, says it didn't happen.

[aTm]

The Atlantic has been down on Trump from day 1 and runs a story with "unnamed sources"? You're going to tell me Mattis or Kelly aren't man enough to put their name with a quote like that? Sorry, try again when you are a real journalist or you're story is up there with the twitter retired marine

There are a few different problems in journalism now that leads to this issue. Yes, the media has basically started using "unnamed sources" as a crutch that allows them to mold the story as they see fit. It's kind of a slow roll down a slippery slope. It is actually perfectly fine, to limit information and protect your source, as long as you know that your source is right and have the information.

Let's say you're a sports reporter, and some high level lackey for Mark Emmert tells you that the NCAA Tournament is definitely going to be canceled, but wont let you use his name. So now, the risk is all on you (since you cant just report that person X told this), are you going to risk your reputation and print the story, or will you wait until it is officially announced and get scooped? Lets say more than one person tells you that, and they are right, you print the story. That is all a perfectly valid use of "unnamed sources."

A second problem that comes along with this is media that doesn't give a fuck if they are wrong. There is so much media now, that much that was limited to disreputable tabloid news is now just out there stated as fact. If you're some fucking blogger, and Mark Emmert's lackey tells you the wrong info, and you publish anyway. Well, what happens then is that the mainstream media like ESPN now publishes the story anyway, they just say that "according to your report" the NCAA Tournament will be canceled, and then backtrack saying they just "reported the report" if its wrong.

Whats not OK is just using an "unnamed source" as a way of hiding the fact that the source is actually unreliable. This seems to be a rising problem, especially as "news" is not about facts but about feelings. The story with Trump and the troops is not about the actual event, its about how people should "feel" about Trump. With the Ukraine thing that we ended up having the whole impeachment rigamarole over, the media used "unnamed source" and "whistleblower" type legalese to hide the fact that the source of it all actually didn't have firsthand knowledge, and less to protect the source, but more to protect the story. The story itself looked worse if someone was able to look into things like whether this person was an opponent of Trump (again because what Trump said was less important, than what feelings could be gained by it) or whether this person actually had the information they said they did. An "unnamed source" is inherently neutral sounding if the audience is not allowed to put a face to it. A real journalist would take what any source tells them, write it down, and then continue to investigate the source and their reliability and motivations also. But now, that's no concern to many, they just need to have sources that agree with the "feeling" of the story and that's good enough.

[Jungle Rat]

Gotta love Fox News. And that other a one.

[sardis]

If you believe any news outlet you’re a retard.

[eCat]

part of it just the hit in revenues , they can't afford to do investigative reporting anymore, paying reporters to be mercenaries for stories to get published, instead of salaried people with a future

I shake my head every time I see a story with a type or misspelled word - and that is frequently.

[Jungle Rat]

Careful sardis. Crotch is going to fire an all out attack on you for using the word retard. Again.

Unless he's a bit biased.

[Jungle Rat]

part of it just the hit in revenues , they can't afford to do investigative reporting anymore, paying reporters to be mercenaries for stories to get published, instead of salaried people with a future

I shake my head every time I see a story with a type or misspelled word - and that is frequently.

Hedges posts piss me off the same wat.

[hedge]

Hello!

[sardis]

Ok, this is quite brazen in its ridiculousness.

https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watc ... ost-public

[eCat]

12 billion eh?

[sardis]

This will cause some heads to explode.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.telegr ... prize/amp/

We’ll see if CNN will report.

[eCat]

yea I saw that earlier.

They gave it to Obama because he wasn't Bush

Turns out he was