Reason Roundup

Newspapers Team Up to Tell Trump They Aren't Colluding Against Him: Reason Roundup

Plus: Mormons versus medical marijuana, bureaucrats are bad at protecting data, and cops tase 87-year-old woman for cutting flowers.

|

editorial headlines over image from CARLOS BARRIA/REUTERS/Newscom

"Journalists are not the enemy." Hot off of calling for more social-media censorship and supporting destructive speech regulations like FOSTA, newspaper editors would like you to know that Donald Trump's dissing of the news media makes them sad. More than 300 U.S. newspapers ran Thursday editorials that "call for an end to President Trump's sustained assault" on the press.

"Our role is to serve as a check on government," the Chicago Tribune declares. "The president ought to get used to it."

"Our democracy is endangered when citizens are persuaded to reject or ignore the professionals who provide news and information," warns The Athens News in Ohio.

And so on.

The editorials were organized by The Boston Globe and, as HuffPost describes them, "have each been constructed with different words but bear a shared message: Mr. President, 'journalists are not the enemy.'"

As a journalist (as well as general enthusiast for classical liberal principles and a person capable of making basic historical analogies), I too find the president's description of journalists as enemies of the people unsettling. But whipping up contempt toward the press has been a staple of right-wing talking points in this country for at least two decades. The president's preening anti-media tirades are not so much stirring new hatred within his base as stoking a longstanding sentiment.

So far, however, Trump's anti-press antics have mostly stayed in the realm of rhetoric. Meanwhile, the good folks in Congress, state government, and federal agencies are doing things all the time that actually infringe on freedom of the press, freedom of speech, and an open internet, while the vast majority of news outlets remain silent at best. Then, in places where we could use real reporting, popular journalists fall all over themselves to create petty drama and praise John McCain for his contributions to warmongering and spending.

While the ideals espoused in these editorials may be righteous, they ring a little hollow…

…and a little self-serving. Too many in media seem to have confused their own diminishing role as gatekeepers of all info and narratives with an existential threat to democracy. Yes, let's fight back against Trump and anyone else in government who seeks to suppress dissent. But maybe people wouldn't hate us so much if we fought as hard for everyone's dignity and right to speak as we do for our own tribe's.

Jack Shafer shares some of these concerns. "It goes without saying that press bashing, Trump-style, is alarming," Shafer writes in Politico. "But this Globe-sponsored coordinated editorial response is sure to backfire: It will provide Trump with circumstantial evidence of the existence of a national press cabal that has been convened solely to oppose him….The Globe's anti-Trump project is also an exercise in redundancy, not to mention self-stroking. Most newspapers have already published a multitude of editorials and columns rebuking the president for his trash-talking of the press."

FREE MINDS

But on to journalists doing good things… The South Florida Sun Sentinel is under fire "for publishing confidential but legally obtained information about Parkland school shooter Nikolas Cruz." The Broward County Public Schools had requested that two reporters and the paper be held in contempt of court after publishing portions of a school district report that Circuit Judge Elizabeth Scherer had ordered redacted before the district made it public.

"At issue is a report released Aug. 3 based on Cruz's educational record, revealing what officials knew about him in the years leading up to his Feb. 14 attack on Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School, where he killed 17 people and wounded 17 more," the Sun Sentinel explains.

But here's the kicker: The school district blacked out sensitive portions of the report only before posting it online, leaving the underlying data intact—a "method [that] made it possible for anyone to read the blacked-out portions by copying and pasting them into another file." More about what the Sun Sentinel found in that "redacted" information here.

University of Southern California journalism professor Philip Seib told the paper, "It sounds to me like the people who were in contempt were those in the government agency who allowed it to be disseminated in a way that any school child could have decoded."

FREE MARKETS

Marijuana vote in Utah hits Mormon snag. In November, Utah voters will get to vote on whether the state should legalize medical marijuana. But only if a lawsuit filed yesterday by Mormon activists is successful. "In the complaint, opponents of Proposition 2—which would legalize marijuana for people with an array of health conditions—said the ballot initiative would tread on their freedom of religion," the Salt Lake Tribune explains. More:

The group says the measure would violate the religious beliefs of Walter J. Plumb, an attorney and active member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints who is the primary financier of the opposition campaign.

The lawsuit takes issue with a provision of the ballot measure that would prevent landlords from not renting to a medical marijuana cardholder, saying that could create an issue of Mormon property owners being forced into renting to people who use cannabis. Plumb's "religious beliefs include a strict adherence to a code of health which precludes the consumption and possession of mind-altering drugs, substances and chemicals, which includes cannabis and its various derivatives," the complaint states.

QUICK HITS

  • Trump has revoked the security clearance of CIA director turned Trump critic John Brennan. "Former national security officials often maintain their security clearances to advise their successors," NPR notes. Trump also offered up a list of nine other folks whose security clearances he was considering revoking.
  • A Georgia cop deployed a stun gun against an 87-year-old woman who was using a knife to cut dandelions. "She told us she was smiling at them to tell them that she wasn't a threat…and she was trying to get closer to them to communicate with them, and that's when they tased her," her grandson told ABC News.
  • Government policies are making the future of porn worse.
  • Happy birthday to Madonna, who at 60 is still pissing people off with her outfits.
  • Elizabeth Warren has a "plan to save capitalism." Sigh.
  • An FBI robbery investigation leads to "an unprecedented grab for Google location data."
  • The Masterpiece Cakeshop battle never ends.
  • The Federal Communications Commission has killed Alex Jones' "Radio Liberty" station, but the move is unrelated to recent social media drama. "According to documents in a lawsuit filed in U.S. District Court in Austin this week, Radio Liberty had been illegally broadcasting over a local FM station from 2013 until it ceased pirating the airwaves in December and switched to online streaming and a call-in 'listen line,'" The Week reports.

Advertisement

NEXT: Is It Racist to Refer to Space 'Colonization'?

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. The editorials were organized by The Boston Globe and, as HuffPost describes them, “have each been constructed with different words but bear a shared message: Mr. President, ‘journalists are not the enemy.'”

    Coordinated attack on the president? Yeah, that will convince doubters.

    1. Hello.

      Modern mainstream pop journalism is pure crap. Garbage. It’s PT Barnum rubbish with just enough real news to keep people distracted from the freakish behaviour. Journalism (Professor Asher drilled this into his class 25 years ago. Yes, this shithead took a couple of journalism class which is why I’m writing this) is reporting the fricken FACTS. No descriptors. No yeah buts. No opinions. No ‘it was a beautiful day on the steps of Capital Hill’. I don’t care about if the anchorman thinks ‘that was a sad story’. Just report and shut up. Asher would lose his mind the second someone inserted their personal opinion in a factual article.

      So spare me if I don’t shed a tear for the plight of papers like the Globe of Hufffington. They made their fricken beds. Now lie in it. It takes a special kind of arrogance to try and convince people these derelicts aren’t undermining a sitting President. They’re not interested in truth. They’re interested in narratives.

      I would have taken them seriously if they, you know, kept a watchful eye on Obama but they didn’t.

      Modern journalism:

      https://bit.ly/2Mg3Tlv

      1. The problem is as it has been for some time. Mainstream journalists exist in a bubble. There was a brief self realization of that once the fog cleared from the devastation of November 9, 2016. They had no idea what a vast portion of America was and had no idea they had no idea. Since that self reflection, we’ve come back around to the echo chamber circle jerk because it’s much more comfortable than allowing outside ideologies into their newsrooms.

        1. They’re idiots.

        2. I sat in on a presentation by the HuffPost editors. They were so proud that after the 2016 surprise they were going on a “Bus Tour of America” to really understand what was going on in middle america. I rolled my eyes at that, since it takes some east coast chutzpa to think that you need to “bus” around “Flyover Country” (these places do have airports, you know). But I thought that finally, they got it.

          Unfortunately, they took their bubble with them. The stories they produced were hilarious. “We found a transgendered person in Alabama and asked them what they thought.” “We visited the home of a single waitress who is trying to run against a GOP dominated city council”.

          These people are so far off to the left, that they are incapable of sitting down with these people they’ve labeled enemies to really understand their perspective.

          1. These Lefties are going to get creamed in election 2018 and 2020 and they dont even see it coming.

    2. Newspapers issue a coordinated news release of editorial boilerplate to prove that they’re not acting in a coordinated manner.

  2. The school district blacked out sensitive portions of the report only before posting it online, leaving the underlying data intact?a “method [that] made it possible for anyone to read the blacked-out portions by copying and pasting them into another file.”

    It’s illegal to take advantage of incompetence!

    1. Eerily reminiscent of the birth certificate kerfuffle.

      *** ducks ***

  3. Bake the cake, bigot:

    Patreon
    @Patreon
    Replying to @jihadwatchRS
    Hi Robert, we emailed you earlier today which explained that unfortunately Mastercard required us to remove your account. You replied to us but if you have further questions we’re happy to keep emailing.

    1. WaPo: What the U.S. can learn from India’s move toward a cashless society
      In November, in a move to curb corruption and eliminate counterfeit bills, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi shocked the country by announcing the discontinuation of all 500- and 1,000-rupee (about $7 and $14) notes ? which account for roughly 86 percent of all money in circulation. The move disrupted the entire economy, caused pain and suffering, and was widely criticized. Yet it was a bold move that will surely produce long-term benefit, because it will accelerate the push to digital currency and the modernization of the Indian economy.

      1. A cashless society is a wet dream for SJWs and central planners everywhere.

        1. It’s just evil. There’s no other way to put it.

          1. Well bitcoin is a digital currency and the progs and central planners have gone apeshit over it, because just like cash, it can’t be traced. So their point is to have a digital currency that can be used to track and control the masses.

            1. That was literally always the goal with non-convertible fiat currency. Since day one, in fact.

            2. Digital currency can in fact be traced. If someone can tie your wallet to you, they know about every transaction you’ve ever made on the block chain.

              1. It can’t easily be traced

      2. Yet it was a bold move that will surely produce long-term benefit, because it will accelerate the push to digital currency and the modernization of the Indian economy.

        “I like things that are *cool*!”

      3. Fuck these people, they are evil scum. This is what evil looks like.

        1. The cashless society people.

    2. I am sure that Lefties will be out to defend bankers when banking regulators question why some customers are having their accounts closed based on political preferences. It will be like Occupy Wall Street never happened.

      1. The progs are literally fascist between their wanting to ‘save’ capitalism by controlling corporations, and using said corporations to control the citizens so they can hide behind “hey, it isn’t the government silencing you”.

        1. It’s OK if the corporations censor you, the 1A only applies to government. The government isn’t controlling those corporations, it is merely empowering the (right) people to control them.

        2. Exactly. The attacks on the 1a were not working so the Lefties decided to use crony capitalism to silence dissenters.

          I think the argument about these tech companies not having ‘safe harbor’ protection anymore is a good one. They are now daily moderating content and should be liable for not removing copyrighted material and other violations of law. Company leadership should be dragged into the legal actions too.

          Just like they did with Enron. If you are a company violating the law that you helped get enacted, your company leadership are to be held personally responsible. I also think stock holders should get cracks at these companies for violating their fiduciary duty. The companies are publicly admitting that they are making political choices rather than financial ones. This defrauds the stock holders.

          1. The companies are publicly admitting that they are making political choices rather than financial ones. This defrauds the stock holders.

            The stockholders aren’t the only stakeholders, and the other stakeholders have priorities other than profits, so the government must empower them, thus shielding corporations from these suits.

    3. Hi Robert, we emailed you earlier today which explained that unfortunately Mastercard required us to remove your account.

      I’m calling bullshit. Whether it’s Spencer or whomever at Patreon (more likely), it’s bullshit. Mastercard would gladly continue to charge Patreon for the declines on Spencer’s card. The only way Mastercard would care is if they thought the card on the account had been fraudulently set up and, even then, wouldn’t give two shits what you do with the rest of his account info. $22B in assets and they’re bothering to mess with whomever the hell Robert Spencer is? Right.

      1. http://www.ft.com/content/c687…..b903247afd

        Mastercard, Visa, AmEx, and Discover all have enforced their cardholder agreements against those who broke the rules.

        1. Which specific rules were broken?

        2. Mastercard, Visa, AmEx, and Discover all have enforced their cardholder agreements against those who broke the rules.

          Hilariously an article behind a paywall. I’m not saying they’ve never enforced cardholder agreements against anyone. I’m saying that it’s highly likely that MasterCard has no idea who Spencer is. Further, whether MasterCard knows who Spencer is or not, their interaction with Patreon in regard to him is strictly limited to payment processing, not other content or the rest of his account. If MasterCard said “Shut him down.” then Patreon took it upon themselves to ‘remove his account’. Considering this isn’t the first time Patreon has taken it upon themselves to fuck over it’s customers who generate ‘unacceptable content’, both left and right, it seems exceedingly likely that they’re passing the buck.

          But, from the tweet, it sounds like we’re jumping into this foray mid-stream. For all we know, his card expired, they told him it expired and it’s being portrayed like they’re deplatforming him.

          1. He’s made a name for himself for religious bias. Maybe Mastercard is using a list provided by another organization (the hated SPLC maybe?) to ensure their network is not used for acts they consider possibly or actually illegal. They made an effort post-Charlottesville.

            1. So you can’t actually point out which rules were broken?

            2. Maybe Mastercard is using a list provided by another organization (the hated SPLC maybe?) to ensure their network is not used for acts they consider possibly or actually illegal.

              I won’t even be so demanding as to ask for proof. I’ll take a piece of evidence, even just shred. Anything to say you aren’t running on abject speculation here.

              They did make efforts post Charlottesville, directly, with their own services, and in places where they could be considered legally culpable. The whole ‘MasterCard made Patreon delete my account./MasterCard said we had to delete your account, so we did.’ narrative(s) are nonsense.

    4. More bitching and whining from JLT about how right-wingers are poor downtrodden victims.

      Why not propose a solution?

      1. The free market is great until it’s hard on them.

        1. Too bad there’s no free market to test your theory on.

        2. Anarcho-tyranny is hardly a free market.

      2. “More bitching and whining from JLT about how right-wingers are poor downtrodden victims.”

        And more bitching from you about other people.

        “Why not propose a solution?”

        Like you didn’t in your little bitchfest?

        Face it. You’re a fucking prog and you prove it daily.

        1. He is a concern troll. We have quite a few of them.

          And yes, he is a full on progressive. He won’t admit it because it would screw up his concern trolling.

          1. He won’t admit it because it would screw up his concern trolling.

            No, Happy’s confirmed he’s a Green Party member and his politics are progressive. He’s not trying to hide it.

            1. The reply was to chemjeff.

    1. I wonder if there’s a “Ship an African Farmer a Rifle” campaign like there was with the Brits in WWII.

  4. “Former national security officials often maintain their security clearances to advise their successors,” NPR notes.

    Publicly, on what a piece of sh*t their current boss is.

  5. OMAROSA’S CLOSE FRIEND JUST BLEW A GAPING HOLE IN HER CLAIM THAT TRUMP USED THE N-WORD
    To be clear, at no time did I participate in a conference call with Katrina Pierson advising me, Jason Miller and Omarosa Manigault-Newman that Frank Luntz had heard President Donald J. Trump use a derogatory racial term ? a claim that Luntz himself has also denied.

    …Today, the individual who Omarosa confirmed to me as having played the second-hand audio recording to her last year confirmed that they have no tape, never had possession of a tape, never claimed to have possession of a tape and never played such a tape for Ms. Manigault-Newman.

    Tonight, on the MSNBC program, Hardball, Omarosa revealed to the general public what she had told me last December: That former Apprentice producer, Bill Pruitt, was the original source of the “N-word” tape.

    Bill Pruitt is a mutual friend.

    I just spoke to Bill Pruitt tonight before releasing this statement.

    He confirmed to me (before Hardball had even gone off the air) that he does NOT have an audio tape of President Trump using the “N-word” and has NEVER had an audio tape of President Trump using the “N-word.” Period.

    1. A made up controversy to sell a book? I can’t even feign surprise sarcastically. At this point “…as revealed in their new behind-the-scenes book.” should directly translate to “…as concocted to sound sensationally untrue in order to make money.”

    2. I remember talk of this supposed tape in mid-2016, during the run-up to the election. If such a tape existed, the vast powers looking to see Clinton elected would have made sure they saw the light of day.

  6. John Brennan is not the “hero” we need, he’s the “hero” we deserve.

    A special kind of “hero” who spies on Congress and then lies about such spying to Congress.

    Between Kristol and Brennan, it’s a real mystery why some people find the #resist movement more disgusting than the MAGA crowd

    1. I love it when his defenders cite his experience in the CIA when he was office chief in Ryihad. He was in charge there when the USS Cole was bombed. Being CIA office chief and have one of the worst intelligence failures in US history on your watch is one hell of a job there John. The guy is a perfect example of the fuck up and move up culture of the Intel Community.

      1. That is the least of Brennan’s offenses. That’s a fart in the wind

        1. True. He spied on the Senate and then lied to their faces about it. You would think even the Democrats in the Senate would have enough self respect to hate the guy for that.

          1. Brennan was making up for it by going after Trump.

            TDS forgives all past sins.

      2. Thanks John, I didnt know that Brennan was station chief in Riyadh.

        1. He’s said to have been Bill Clinton’s daily briefer as well.

          On the positive side, he’s never been a bishop, IYKWIM.

      3. Close. Brennan was the station chief in Riyadh when the Khobar Towers were bombed in 1996. The USS Cole bombing was in 2000 – by then, Brennan was chief of staff to the then CIA director.

        Your point still stands, though. The Khobar incident was a colossal intel failure. And the Cole bombing was not long after Brennan left Saudi Arabia, so there’s still some blame to go around.

  7. The Federal Communications Commission has killed Alex Jones’ “Radio Liberty” station, but the move is unrelated to recent social media drama.

    Radio doesn’t know the internet exists.

    1. Radio killed the internet star?

    2. “The free market is working! Could it BE anymore obvious?”

      – Chandler Bing

      1. Why’d he have a bug up his ass yesterday about the fact that Elizabeth Warren is an economic illiterate, anyway?

        1. Because I forgot that Germany doesn’t have any manufacturing?

          1. Is that the vox talking point for today? Seems kinda dumb, but it is vox.

            1. Dunno. I don’t read it regularly.
              I googled codetermination. Found that it’s been the law in Germany for forty years. Remembered that the President keeps saying they kick our ass in trade.

  8. “Journalists are not the enemy.”

    Yes, you are. You are actively trying to undermine the Constitution and our Constitutional Democratic Republic.

    Most of the media has become the propaganda arm of the Leftist movement.

    1. The truth of course is that the damage to the media’s credibility is self-inflicted. And it’s something that started WAY before Trump ever got elected.

      Of course 99% of JournoLists are completely delusional and live in an impenetrable bubble of unreality, and are thus incapable of even recognizing this, much less acknowledging it. So it’s extremely refreshing when one of them like Nolan Finley admits the plain truth. Kudos Mr. Finley.

      1. I’m not sure why we give them the benefit of the doubt that they work in a bubble and that is the reason for their dishonesty.

        Incentives are far more often the most likely causation. Our media is corrupt, and I believe it will be proven eventually.

    2. If journalists regard themselves as the check on the government, then being the check sometimes means being seen as an enemy.

      1. And that is what those in power will always do. It doesn’t matter if it’s Trump or Obama. They will view an adversarial press as ‘the enemy’.

        It’s up to the citizens to call bullshit on that and support a press that holds the powerful accountable.

        1. Except the press is responsible for supporting leftists who are attempting to abrogate the Constitution, and aren’t checking anyone.

        2. support a press that holds the powerful accountable.

          AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.

          1. Chemjeff is a moron if that is what he believes the press is doing. Most of the powerful people in this world are against Trump. The only reason he is even still president is because of the millions of individuals that support him or at least hate his enemies more than they hate him.

      2. It also means being a check on the government ALL THE TIME. Not just when the opposition is in power. Journolists today are nothing more than DNC propagandists and that is a role they voluntarily took on.

    3. You are actively trying to undermine the Constitution and our Constitutional Democratic Republic

      Freedom of the press doesn’t undermine the Constitution, lol

      1. I’m not surprised you’d ignore what they are actually doing and focus on “freedom of the press”

        LOL.

      2. It’s “freedom of the press”, not “freedom from consequences”.

      3. The media is using the protections of the constitution to destroy the USA.

        We all know the media loves to be propaganda pieces for the Lefties.

  9. A Georgia cop deployed a stun gun against an 87-year-old woman who was using a knife to cut dandelions.

    Grandma got run over by the police state…

  10. Newspapers all over America are writing articles critical of Trump. That sounds so different than every day for the last three years.

    Trump criticizes the media for being a cabal that is out to get him. The media’s response to this criticism is to form a cabal that is out to get him and announce doing so to the world. I don’t think journalism is attracting the best and brightest to the profession.

    1. They are even printing their plans to form a cabal to get Trump.

      Truth is better than fiction.

      1. I am not sure there has been a man in the last 100 years or more who is luckier in his enemies than Trump. People talk about how Trump is a bad businessman or he inherited his money or whatever. What they don’t take into account is that even the worst real estate developer is apparently leaps and bounds more intelligent and competent than our media and political class.

        1. Trump has really surprised me with how he owns his opponents. I would have voted for him had I known.

          Trump lived among Democrats and RINOs and has the magic touch to own them both. The media cannot even come with a plan to slow Trump down let alone defeat him. I think the corruption of NY and New Jersey had more to play with his real estate business not being as successful as it could have been. His decision with those two Atlantic City casinos (?) was bad.

          Trump’s major problem is that there are too many RINOs in Congress to get his agenda passed. The RINOs just side with Democrats, then Trump’s agenda is derailed.

          1. I have said since day one the way to go after Trump is kill him with kindness and reasonableness and co-opt some of his positions to appeal to his supporters. If you do that, then Trump’s bluster makes him look unreasonable and you reasonable. The genius of Trump is that he has the ability to infuriate his opponents into looking unreasonable and attacking his supporters. Trump basically has one move; take an issue he knows is popular with his supporters and important to the public and say something about it that he knows will shock and infuriate his enemies in the media and politics. Then watch his enemies go insane over his statement allowing him to be the only one who seems concerned about the issue or offering any solutions. It is not hard to see what he does. Yet, his enemies seem to be constitutionally incapable of understanding what is happening to them much less counter it.

            1. Their whole World has been turned upside down. As you say John, they could mitigate Trump’s political power by stepping back, taking a breath, and make logical points about why they dont like Trump or what he is doing.

              I totally understand the trade argument that pressuring China and the EU wont work to get lower trade restrictions. The Lefties wont do that. The Lefties dont really like America, so they are scared that Trump will be successful. People like me are worried that it wont work. My motivation is that I want Americans to get freer trade. The Left’s motivation is to see Trump and America fail.

              Lefties dont like the “n” D Chess thing but they hate it because it applies. The Left cannot keep up with Trump’s moves.

              1. Your straw man is quite well constructed.

                Trump promised everything to everyone. Infrastructure. Health Care for everyone. Tax Cuts. Defense Spending. Pay off the debt. Not touch Social Security, Medicare or Medicaid.

                He did a better job at promising free shit to everybody, and he went full racist. “Textbook definition of a racist comment.”

                1. Thank you for providing a perfect example of the kind of idiot Trump is dealing with. Thanks to people like you, Trump is going to sale through 8 years in office. It is one thing to be stupid and no know much. You clearly are that. But, you manage to also have no idea just how stupid you are and how little you know. In fact, you think you are right on top of things. You utterly lack any self-awareness of how stupid you are or how the world actually works. Since you live in a bubble surrounded by people who are exactly like you, you have no one to help you realize how stupid you are and probably wouldn’t listen to anyone who tried anyway.

                  1. Perfect response to happy c. Agree completely. This phenomenon is widespread.

                    Anyone willing to set their emotions aside to inspect what Trump is doing can see it clearly.

                    What amazes me is that there are so many people incapable of doing so. It kind of makes me sad for humanity.

                  2. I’m here. That’s me getting out of my bubble.

                    I’ve learned where Trump’s support comes from. People who babble puerile insults to anyone who disagrees. People with very strong motivated reasoning despite any facts.

                    1. People who babble puerile insults to anyone who disagrees. People with very strong motivated reasoning despite any facts.

                      You never had to leave your bubble to find that.

                2. Trump promised everything to everyone.

                  And this makes him different from any other establishment politician how?

                  1. Yeah Red Rocks, to hear a team Blue hack like Chandler bitching that Trump won because he promised free shit is rich even for that moron.

                    1. People who babble puerile insults to anyone who disagrees.

                      Over and over.

                      It’s kind of endearing.

                  2. He didn’t even try to pretend that he had a plan to do it. He promised guns, butter, and tax cuts.

                    Republicans have always made noise that they would cut spending. That’s not popular, but it’s their political philosophy. It never happens in practice, but it’s what they say they’re going to do. Trump promised all the goodies of the Democrats and all the tax cuts and deficit reduction of Republicans. Come to think about it, Trump is basically following the W model, lots of spending, cut taxes, deficits don’t matter. Everything to everyone.

                    Say what you want about Obama, but he had a fully sketched out health care plan, with pay fors and mechanisms. Clinton had too many white papers.

                    Now we have Republicans who promise free shit and tax cuts, and Democrats who promise free shit and no tax cuts. What’s a libertarian to do?

                    1. Obama had a fully sketched out health plan?! HAHAHAHAHA

                      So explain the illegal deferments. Explain why even they had to admit that CLASS was actuarially unsound. Explain the illegal cost sharing agreements. Explain the 50% higher per capita Medicaid spending. The only thing that has temporarily saved Barrycare is the fact that a big chunk of red states didn’t expand Medicaid.

                    2. 1) Many of the problems came from the sausage making.
                      2) Not everything works. Usually, with a new program, there are some clean up bills. Congress wouldn’t pass anything. He did what he could, and it helped. I don’t remember anything being ruled illegal.
                      3) Medicaid: Per enrolee spending is slower than private insurance spending, was both before and after the AHCA.

                      But, irrespective of whether it all worked perfectly, it was an actual plan. Trump had no plans in his campaign. He had no health care plan. He had no infrastructure plan. What has passed Congress? What was even presented?

                      The result of the ACA was that the rate of uninsured has dropped precipitously. None of the horror stories came to pass. Business went on. And, as a direct result, I have insurance for my family I could not have gotten otherwise.

                    3. He didn’t even try to pretend that he had a plan to do it.

                      There were policy pages on his campaign website. Just because you didn’t read them doesn’t mean they didn’t exist.

                      I’m still curious as to how you think Trump making wild promises makes him different from any other politician.

                    4. “Say what you want about Obama, but he had a fully sketched out health care plan, ”

                      Too many obvious trolls on this site now

                3. Is nationality the same thing as ethnicity? Honest question, genius.

                  As a bonus, is one’s religion the same as one’s ethnicity?

                  1. Who are you asking?
                    All three are independent variables. There is a lot of overlap, however.

                    You can be an Asian Australian Jew.
                    You can be a black French Muslim.
                    You can be an Arab Israeli Christian.

                    1. So, you’re going to just ignore the question then. Ok.

                      I only ask because it’s a bit of a stretch to say that one can be racist towards Muslims or Mexicans, since as it just so happens neither of those things are a race.

                      Yet somehow, the people who claim to understand racism the most continually make such a basic error in logic. Curious. It’s almost like the people shouting racism the loudest understand it the least, while real racism becomes so rare that most people forget what it even looks like.

                      Not to say that racism is dead, such an outcome is impossible. Rather having almost entirely wiped it out, the left has forgotten what it actually looks like at all. Which is actually rather a shame, I think, since if you cry wolf often enough no one comes to look when there really is a wolf.

                    2. Semantics.
                      Racism is easy to say.
                      The difference between being a bigot against people for their race, their ethnicity, nationality, religion, or other reasons is not important.

                      If it’s not being a bigot against race, I try to refer to people as bigots. It’s a nice catch all.

                      But the quote that I used was from Paul Ryan. He’s not exactly…enlightened on the matter.

                    3. rather just be me.

  11. Strange silence on the whole school shooter training aspect.

    New Mexico compound member in US illegally over 20 years: government
    TAOS, N.M., Aug 15 (Reuters) – A Haitian woman who was charged with child abuse at a New Mexico compound has been taken into custody by immigration authorities after living in the United States illegally for over 20 years, immigration officials said on Wednesday.

    …The body is believed to be that of the 3-year-old son of Leveille’s husband, Siraj Ibn Wahhaj. Wahhaj is accused of abducting the severely ill boy from his mother in Georgia in order to carry out faith healing on him. In court testimony on Monday, a Federal Bureau of Investigations agent said the boy died in February in a healing ritual carried out by Ibn Wahhaj at the compound.

    1. The 8th Amendment guarantees everyone non-excessive bail. Even these defendants.

      1. The guarantee is non-excessive bail, not zero bail. I haven’t heard that holding someone w/o bail is at all times unconstitutional.

        1. “The guarantee is non-excessive bail, not zero bail.”
          While true, non-excessive bail can be release on Own Recognizance. I thought these defendants in this case were granted a bond?

          The whole bail denial for charge, flight risk, no ties to community…. is BULLSHIT and 100% unconstitutional. Its been the system for decades because we let it. There are no exceptions to deny bail, otherwise why have a constitutional protection if the state can just make an excuse to deny bail?

          Set bail low and if the person does not appear, then set bail high but ‘non-excessive’ since they have tried to flee justice. The Constitution already allows for interstate fugitive recovery.

          If a defendant is that dangerous, put cops on them to make sure they dont flee or hurt anyone. Its expensive but a constitutional way to protect the public.

    2. >>> died in February in a healing ritual

      witch doctor fail

  12. Elizabeth Warren has a “plan to save capitalism.” Sigh.

    The free market will thrive on its reservation.

    1. We have to kill it to save it.

    2. I couldn’t read past the part where she reasons that “since corporations want to have the rights of people…” Look, if you don’t understand the concept of corporate personhood, and that it isn’t simply the same as corporations having the same rights as a people you ain’t the right person to save capitalism no you shouldn’t be lowed to be a judge, either.

  13. The lawsuit takes issue with a provision of the ballot measure that would prevent landlords from not renting to a medical marijuana cardholder, saying that could create an issue of Mormon property owners being forced into renting to people who use cannabis.

    I agree. Take the provision out and let the measure pass.

    1. I disagree, unless you’re going to let landlords decide to kick people out for taking other medications as well.

      “I have a religious objection to chemotherapy. You’re out at the end of the month.”

      1. And the problem is …?

        It’s the same with racism, religionism, sexism, and other bigotry. The surest way to kill it, to reform society, to make bigots see the error of their ways, is to bring it out in the open, to let the bigots declare their bigotry to the world, and for the world to turn up their noses and take their business and friendship elsewhere. It’s the same reason the Cuban embargo was so counterproductive, the same reason dictators the world round try to close their borders and lock out unwelcome ideas with radio jammers.

      2. Except for the whole ‘pot doesn’t really have any particular medical benefit’ bit, whereas chemotherapy does.

        But no, beyond the fact those two things are entirely different you’re right that the rights of any random yahoo on the street definitely trump the rights of the person that owns the property.

        /sarc

      3. I’m not entirely sure in general that anyone has a right to a lease.

    2. As long as other Utahns aren’t also required to rent to Mormons.

      Hahahahhahhahahahaahhaha

      1. Both non-Mormon Utahns would appreciate the new freedom, I’m sure.

      2. Is the consensus here that landlords should in general be required to rent to anyone?

  14. Chairman Trump hates the free press.

    1. If only he showed his love for the free press by spying on journalists and threatening them with indictment the way Obama did.

      Do you think everyone has forgotten that? You really are retarded.

      1. Whataboutism is still strong!

        The NYT and WaPo editorialized strongly against that one, even though it was a competitor.

        Is Fox returning the favor?

        1. No it is not. Trump hasn’t done any of those things. He hasn’t done anything but criticize the press, which is his right. There is no whataboutism. There is the fact that Obama engaged in all kinds of unethical and illegal actions against the media and Trump hasn’t. It is really that simple. If you had an IQ above 50 and were anything but mendacious, you would see that. Admitting the truth about Obama’s actions towards the media and Trump’s lack thereof doesn’t mean you have to support Trump. It just means you are honest.

        2. Whataboutism is still strong!

          “Tribalism is okay when we do it!”

        3. Yes.

          Now what were you saying about strongly motivated claims without a basis in fact?

          Oh, and can you point to the 300 coordinated editorials condemning Obama’s unprecedented harassment of reporters? I realize that’s weak tea compared to trump calling them BAD NAMES(tm) but it kinda seems like actions matter just a tad more than words.

          1. There were editorials. As a result, an investigation was undertaken and a revised policy was implemented to fix the problem.
            The media provided a check on the executive.

            1. The media prints opinion as fact.

              More and more Americans are just no falling for it anymore.

    2. Have you made that appointment to see a dermatologist yet?

  15. But maybe people wouldn’t hate us so much if we fought as hard for everyone’s dignity and right to speak as we do for our own tribe’s.

    I DIDN’T COME TO AM LINKS TO GET EDITORIALIZED TO.

  16. New national poll shows Brett Kavanaugh is 13 points underwater, with more than half the public saying they don’t know enough. The only thing weaker than Kavanaugh’s poll numbers at this point is Senate Dems who are still afraid to oppose him.

    Did you hear that? 13 points underwater!

    I urge my fellow libertarians to contact your US Senators and tell them to oppose this dangerous (and financially irresponsible) right-wing extremist. Drumpf should not get any more Supreme Court picks until Mueller’s investigation is complete. And he certainly shouldn’t get to appoint somebody under such suspicious circumstances: Kennedy retired at a bizarrely early age, and his son has a longstanding business relationship with Drumpf.

    #StopKavanaugh
    #Resist

    1. I guess Kavanaugh is in real trouble in his election bid against the other Supreme Court Candidates.

      1. Brett Kavanaugh, Donald Trump’s nominee to replace retiring Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy, has underwater
        personal ratings, with just 15% favorable, 28% unfavorable, and 57% unable to give an opinion.

        I actually feel kinda good that 57% of those surveyed were honest enough to say idk. It likely should have been closer to 99.99%, because it really can’t be more than a few thousand people in this country who could actually talk about Kavanaugh without simply parroting team talking points.

    2. According to a poll of completely ignorant people, only 43% of people can be bothered to fake an answer. {yawn}

    3. #StillWithHim
      #InternsToo
      #MinorsToo

  17. Chelsea Clinton Just Boasted That Legalizing Abortion Helped Add Trillions to the Economy
    “It is not a disconnected fact […] that American women entering the labor force from 1973 to 2009 added three and a half trillion dollars to our economy,” Clinton said, according to CNSNews.com. “Right? The net, new entrance of women ? that is not disconnected from the fact that Roe became the law of the land in January of 1973.”

    1. The left really do see children as parasites. Don’t kid yourself into thinking these people would not commit mass murder in a heartbeat if they had the power and someone told them it was necessary for the common good.

      1. They’re very stupid, unwise people.

    2. Forcing women to stay home and have babies is so libertarian.

      1. Because women are helpless butterflies with no agency and anytime they do anything “unprogressive” it must be because they were forced to by evil libertarians.

        1. Real libertarians are pro-choice.

          1. like most non-libertarians, you don’t know what the word “choice” means

            1. actually that’s an insult to non-libertarians, like most progressives…you don’t know what the word means

        2. What? I heard that womyn are powerful super-beings who can do anything (and have it all).

        3. Taking away their choice to protect their agency. Got it!

          1. So, their agency and choice extends to ending a pregnancy but doesn’t count when fucking without protection.

            Ok.

            1. That’s their agency too. I don’t see liberals trying to make laws about that.

          2. Even the majority of people who identify themselves as “pro-choice” support restrictions on abortion.

            1. Hard when you can see a baby moving and stretching in an ultrasound at 12 weeks or less.

              Even the sociopaths on the left have a hard time ignoring that reality.

          3. Removing personal responsibility has always worked out so well. Now tell me the one where not paying for her contraception is denying her her reproductive rights.

            1. That’s not denying reproductive rights.
              That’s providing preventive care, which is good public policy.

              1. So you believe that food should be provided through insurance too? Is preventing murder good public policy or not? Or does the question only apply when we like the person?

      2. Another denizen of the “I fucking love science” crowd who is apparently unaware of how babies get made. I guess you think those evil patriarchal cis-hetero shitlords just point their fingers and say “Shazam! That one is pregnant!” Yeah, the women play no role whatsoever…

        1. Well, in the morning after revision…

    3. It hurt my economy. I have less kids to work my diamond mines.

      1. Top hat and monocle makers hardest hit.

    4. Immigrants increase demand and bring in new workers, which is good for the economy.

      Abortion, which does not increase population like immigration does, is good for the economy.

      1. But it leads to a larger workforce… like immigration. Try to keep up.

        1. the dead babies probably would have gotten jobs eventually

          1. Because unwanted children often go on to be productive members of society.

            1. Dead babies are the only demographic you can say that about without being a bigot, BTW.

            2. Just because you are unwanted and nonproductive doesn’t mean everyone else is.

              Anyone have a comparison of the number of poor women having abortions vs. the number of middle class (white) professional women Chelsea thinks are the only women who exist?

              1. A compelling case has been made that legalized abortion contributed to the otherwise unexplained drop in crime rates that started happening, you know, about 16-20 years later.

                1. Tony is now an admitted racist.

                2. Tony’s claim has been refuted more times than it has been substantiated. The theory is riddled with holes that requires you to avoid all other variables that might have led to the decline in crime.

                  I’m always amazed that when pressed *pro-choice* (only if it’s the right choice) people always default to the same talking points used by early 20th century advocates of eugenics. That’s always disturbed me about the discussion of abortion and euthanasia, it always comes back to eugenics.

                  Almost as if there is some sort of connection or something

                  1. I’m convinced it was video games, personally.

                    1. “I’m convinced it was video games, personally.”

                      And I’m convinced its the widespread availability of air conditioning. Or probably all 3 working in tandem.

                3. And there’s no way you could look at abortion rates and other demographics and conclude anything ever about crime.

                  Because tolerance and diversity.

            3. You’d have be literally retarded to say that reducing the workforce leads to a larger workforce, but Tony is willing to make that statement out loud.

              Shout it from the rooftops, Tony. By all means make that point explicitly to as many people as you can.

              1. Try to imagine that women exist.

                1. they’re super-lovely.

          2. the dead babies probably would have gotten jobs eventually

            Well, half of them might have, and the other half of them would have had to just make more babies.

            1. And you would have tried to fuck all of them.

        2. Births to American citizens are below replacement level. It is leading to a decline in human capital in the long term.

    5. New DNC motto:

      Abort fetuses, expand the economy!

    6. what would she know about entering the labor force?

      1. Chelsea was there when her Mom’s snuke forced her out during labor?

      2. Well, yeah, exactly, and note she’s a mother.

  18. “It goes without saying that press bashing, Trump-style, is alarming,” Shafer writes in Politico.

    Is it really that alarming? Obama managed the WHPC photograph releases and prosecuted whistleblowers and journalists. Hillary literally corralled members of the press. How bad are words when you can use the power of the state to attack journalism?

    1. Trump is doing nothing but using his free speech.

      But as with most leftists, it is only okay when they do it.

  19. The jury should begin deliberations on Paul Manafort at any time. Predictions on whether or not he gets convicted of anything?

    1. He’ll get convicted of tax evasion. But, the trial had nothing to do with Russian collusion and all the crimes of failing to register as a foreign agent for Ukraine, embezzlement, and tax evasion occurred before the Trump campaign.

      Where are the fever dreams we were promised? I guess the media pimping CIA talking points isn’t going to help their credibility

    2. 18 criminal offenses is a lot of charges.

      I think the Defense did more than play a strategy to no provide a single witness. The Defense knows that the state has failed to prove any of the charges beyond a reasonable doubt.

      The state has to prove that Manafort knowingly committed tax fraud and bank fraud. He had professionals doing much of the paperwork. This ‘professionals’ were granted immunity and then said Manafort broke the law. It seems pretty clear, those professional broke the law and are trying to drag Manafort down with them.

      A biased jury is a biased jury, so not defense witnesses would help that bias.

      Judges dont normally acquit a Defendant while a jury is impaneled but in this case, I think the judge wanted Manafort to be acquitted based on the lack of state’s case so Manafort would not have to worry about being recharged.

      Who knows for sure.

    3. I think it is 50 50 that he walks. From what I can tell, the only evidence the government had against him was the testimony of his accountant who admitted on the stand that he was stealing millions of Manfort. The government asked the jury to believe a guy who was stealing millions from his client that he told Manfort that he did all of these tax evasions. The bottom line is the accountant witness was the guy who did all of the things Manfort is accused of doing. The government’s case rests on the jury believing the accountant when he says he did those things with Manfort’s blessing.

      The jury might believe the accountant. But they are just as likely in my opinion to conclude the accountant is so dirty there is no way to tell what Manfort knew and thus no way to convict him. The fact that the defense didn’t put on a single witness is a pretty good indication that they are confident the government didn’t prove its case and they are going to win. We will see if that is true. The defense sometimes guess wrong about how compelling a jury finds the government’s case. But I would not be surprised if Manfort walks.

      1. Here’s hoping he does walk.

        1. It sounds like a weak Mueller case and it will send the Lefties into a crying spree lasting through this weekend.

          1. “Agh! The jury was all RUSSIANS!!!”

        2. Seriously? How much crime does a Republican have to commit?

          1. None. He’ll be acquitted.

            When Hillary is charged, it will set a new criminal justice record for how many violations of the law she has committed.

            1. You’re a joke, right?

            2. Tonys off his meds again.

          2. I agree that he shouldn’t be spared a conviction, but it is rather rich to have Podesta used as a material witness against him when Podesta was also an unregistered lobbyist of a foreign power. The only difference is that Podesta lobbied on behalf of the pro-Russia party in Ukraine, while Manafort lobbied for pro-EU interests in Ukraine.

            http://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/24/wor…..tment.html

            1. That article says that Manafort hired Podesta to set up meetings with Europeans.

              Manafort was working for the guy who exiled to Russia after being impeached and driven from office.

              1. http://www.politico.com/story/2018/02…..ury-380579

                Manafort and Podesta worked for the same Ukrainian group. Manafort’s work was devoted to bringing Ukraine closer to EU contacts.

                Funny how you term a western backed coup as “impeached and driven from office”.

                “Salvadore Allende was impeached and driven from office”

                – Chandler Bing

          3. It is called being presumed innocent and the government having the burden to prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt. Fortunately, the criminal justice system has not entirely been infiltrated by dangerous hateful idiots like you who think calling someone a Republican is sufficient to convict them.

            You really are a living example of nearly everything that can go wrong with the human race. You are stupid, vindictive, ignorant, superstitious, bigoted and utterly irrational.

          4. Tony|8.16.18 @ 11:11AM|#
            “Seriously? How much crime does a Republican have to commit?”

            Are you asking how much will result in a conviction? Good question; I guess one more crime than that hag, since she’s still walking.

            1. Problem is you have to prove intent beyond a reasonable doubt. I dont think they did. But with a jury anything is possible.

              I give it 60 /40 he walks out a free man, but only 10 percent that he does any significant jail time.

              1. And if they throw the book, it will be because the jury was composed entirely of lizard people, correct?

        3. Chances are approximately zero that he walks, because he will still be held for the second trial without bail.

          1. And that case is even more ridiculous. And regardless, Trump will likely pardon him after the midterms anyway. I almost hope he gets convicted just to watch losers like you cry and scream when Trump pardons him at some point.

            1. Mueller made sure to not charge every crime he committed (of which there are many) to leave state trials a possibility.

              If he’s pardoned, he has no fifth amendment rights and can be compelled to testify.

              1. Mueller is an idiot whose team has made one mistake after another in court. And yes, if Manfort is pardoned, he then has to talk about all of these things he did years before he ever even met Trump. You are going to get him someday. God you people are pathetic.

              2. Mueller cannot prosecute in state courts. Mueller can only get a grand jury indictment for federal offenses. Technically Mueller’s mandate only covers crimes relating to Russian interference with elections but the Lefties gave up on that requirement at the beginning.

                Trump can pardon for offenses that Manafort might be convicted of. Its does nt have to be a blanket pardon of all offenses.

                This Lefty plan is falling apart more every day that passes.

              3. If he’s pardoned, he has no fifth amendment rights and can be compelled to testify.

                If he’s pardoned, the pardon is permanent.

              4. It’s amazing that none of the charges relate to collusion.

          2. Trump will pardon Manafort. If he even gets convicted.

            All the other dum dums who pled guilty because they were scared of Mueller wont get pardoned.

            Trump likes fighters and Manafort will make Mueller even worse than Mueller does on his own.

      2. They also had Manafort’s emails. And a paper trail a mile long.
        But, juries are weird. OJ wasn’t convicted.

        Curious if you have any idea what Manafort meant when he wanted to use his campaing position to make whole with Deripaska?

        1. The paper trail doesn’t show intent or even knowledge. If it did, they wouldn’t have had to call the crooked attorney to the stand. The government has a very weak case that relies on an admitted criminal’s testimony. You being a complete moron who believes whatever you hope is true is, don’t understand that.

          Yes, juries are wierd. They might convict him even though the government got its ass handed them in the trial. You never know.

          1. Riiiiiiight, I’m the one with the motivated reasoning. He had no idea that people were committing tax fraud and bank fraud for his benefit. He’s a victim who received millions of ill gotten dollars!

            Any idea on the make whole with Deripaska email?

            1. He had no idea that people were committing tax fraud and bank fraud for his benefit.

              When you consider that he also had no idea that the accountant was stealing millions from him, likely not. Doing illegal things with other people’s money to cover up your own theft is pretty much SOP for crooked accountants. The illegal proceeds take the place of the money you steal and the client never knows.

              Is that what happened? Who knows. But it is called reasonable doubt dumb ass. All the jury has to conclude is that it is reasonable to believe it might have happened that way and Manfort walks. Most juries tend to rise to the occasion and do not act like deranged partisan retards like you at least in criminal cases. Stop wasting my time spewing nonsense about a subject you clearly know nothing about.

              1. Chanandler is going to be hit especially hard when Manafort walks.


              2. When you consider that he also had no idea that the accountant was stealing millions from him, likely not. Doing illegal things with other people’s money to cover up your own theft is pretty much SOP for crooked accountants. The illegal proceeds take the place of the money you steal and the client never knows.

                I’ve been tangentially involved in a case sort of like this one. In that case, a lawyer was setting up shelters for their client in Panama and while the client was almost certainly aware that the lawyer was doing something shady apparently did not realize that they were also being stolen from even while they probably knew the lawyer was breaking the law in creating these shelters.

                So, honestly I could see that going either way. Manafort is probably guilty of something (who isn’t, in politics?), but it sounds to me like the prosecution went to court before they should have OR they simply don’t have the ability to get to the information they would need to successfully prosecute their case. Getting records from overseas nations that are going through civil wars isn’t exactly easy.

                I’d say this is pretty good proof that Mueller doesn’t have jack or shit, given that he seems unable to stick anything to a man that is almost certainly guilty of something. I’m not a lawyer though, that’s just my armchair opinion.

                1. BYOB, I think your opinion is likely correct. The best Mueller seems to have is Manfort, who worked for Trump for like a month I think, and his crooked accountant doing crooked shit years before he ever met Trump. How people convince themselves that is somehow going to lead to some big revelation that Trump worked with the Russians to steal the election from Hillary is beyond me.


                  1. How people convince themselves that is somehow going to lead to some big revelation that Trump worked with the Russians to steal the election from Hillary is beyond me.

                    Same here.

                    See, I just assume that every politician has a bunch of shady illegal types in their orbit. The more money that politician has, the more probable that they have these types circling them. I have never known a single wealthy person that this did not apply to.

                    To me, it’s bizarre that anyone thinks that a politician is surrounded only by those who are pure of heart. Sorry, folks, politics doesn’t attract that type of person and even if it does those people don’t win.

  20. “I’ll pay attention to NYTimes lectures on free speech when they admit it’s a right other people have too”

    – Iowahawk

    1. He is one of our greatest national treasures.

  21. A South Carolina company plans to lay off almost all its workers ? 126 people ? because of the Trump administration’s tariffs.

    Element Electronics, which assembles televisions, notified the state of the expected job cuts earlier this week. The company also plans to close its plant in the town of Winnsboro.

    The company said the layoffs and plant closure were a direct result of US tariffs on goods imported from China, including important parts that Element uses to put together TVs.

    1. Pick them cherries, turd. That and outright lying pretty much covers your abilities.
      Oh, and fuck off.

      1. Why do you hate American manufacturers, Sevo?

        1. Why do you hate America Buttplugger?

        2. “Why do you hate American manufacturers, Sevo?”

          Why is it impossible for you to be honest, turd?

  22. So I was spanking it this morning when I realized that Kim Jong Un doesn’t really look like a villain. He’s definitely a bad guy, but do an image search. Kim Jong Un’s appearance is that of a fat Asian guy with a bad haircut, not an evil megalomanic.

    1. … so he no longer turns you on or you just have a different take now?

    2. If you are spanking it and thinking of Kimchee Dong Dung, you are doing it wrong.

      1. You don’t think about stuff other than hot dude bods when you spank it? I mean, the hot dudes get it started, but my mind has a tendency to wander so I can prolong the magic.

  23. “Consumer Reports finds ‘concerning’ levels of heavy metals in some baby foods”
    https://abcnews.go.com/GMA/Family
    /consumer-reports-finds-levels-heavy
    -metals-baby-foods/story?id=57205340

    OMG! Kemiculz in foods! That’s almost like there’s radiation in the AIR!!!
    Are these levels dangerous? No, they’re ‘concerning’.

    1. “This is of a concern because people should not have heavy elements or heavy metals in their food, particularly for their children,”

      Sounds like this spokesperson has ingested heavy metals.

    2. Sounds like a challenging music choice for meal time.

  24. 2 X amazing:

    “Should Coffee Come With Cancer Warnings? California Says No”
    […]
    “In every cup of coffee, there is a chemical linked to cancer.”
    https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/15/business/
    coffee-cancer-warning-california.html

    Amazing #1: The NYT would print that sentence.
    Amazing #2: Some CA judge is bright enough to tell the nannies to fuck off.

  25. I’m not sure how to feel about the marijuana story. On the one hand, marijuana should be legal and the lawsuit is pretty clearly an attempt to derail a vote on legalization. On the other hand, this is a “bake the cake” type demand that will be made of landlords. Upthread Fist said that the provision should be taken out, which would be the simple, logical thing to do, which is why it won’t happen. I’m not sure who to be in favor of here.

    1. I think I side with the Mormons on that one. If you don’t want to be around it, you shouldn’t be forced to be by the government.

      1. Marijuana, while it can leave an unpleasant odor behind, is essentially harmless.

        Chemo drugs are actually toxic.

        If I don’t want to be around chemo drugs, (or more, don’t want my house to be around chemo drugs, because honestly, how many landlords live with their tenants?), should I be allowed to kick residents out if they get cancer?

        I mean, the obvious, libertopia, read-all-your-contracts-first answer is “sure, if the lease says I can”. But we don’t live there, and I suspect that there are tenancy laws that this would run afoul of.

        1. You should be allowed choose your tenants regardless of the reason.

    2. It’s pretty easy. Side with freedom. Don’t side with lefties who can’t separate Natural Rights from Positive Rights.

    3. On the other hand, this is a “bake the cake” type demand that will be made of landlords. Upthread Fist said that the provision should be taken out, which would be the simple, logical thing to do, which is why it won’t happen. I’m not sure who to be in favor of here.

      You know landlords aren’t allowed to not rent to people because they’re Mormon, right?

      1. So let’s create another protected class? This seems to always be the crux of the argument made by progressive libertarians.

        Libertarian: Why do we need to include transgender people as a protected class? Where does it end?

        Progressive libertarian: You know, religious people are a protected class

        Libertarian: Ok? What’s your point here?

        Progressive libertarian: Identity politics, mainly

        1. What is the actual likelihood that Mormons would actually forbid someone from renting a unit because they use medical marijuana? What is the likelihood that these Mormon landlords would even know that one of their tenants uses medical marijuana?

          1. If you want to go with the stereotype of “backward hateful Christian…reeeeee!” Mormons are probably not the best group to use as a boogeyman.

            1. Mormons are probably not the best group to use as a boogeyman.

              Why, because they’re “nice”? They’re still teaching kids there’s an afterlife, right?

              1. I use to think that you were reasonable, but you just seem hateful

                1. You’re the one who thought I was looking for a “stereotype of ‘backward hateful Christian'” when all I was looking for was antidiscrimination law that protects the group that the hypocrite filing this lawsuit belongs to. I mean, he seems to be hateful of marijuana users, doesn’t he? And if he’s not, then why would I seem hateful of religion users?

          2. What is the actual likelihood that Mormons would actually forbid someone from renting a unit because they use medical marijuana?

            I don’t understand what bearing that has on infringing on a landlord’s freedom to exclude Mormons from his property.

            1. I don’t understand what bearing that has on infringing on a landlord’s freedom to exclude Mormons from his property.

              Can you show us an example of where this actually takes place, or are you simply being your typical passive-aggressive self?

              1. Are you asking for an example of a landlord being prevented from discriminating on the basis of religion? Here’s one:

                The complaint against Maple Garden owner William Greda of Elizabeth alleges that, in February of this year, Greda greeted a would-be renter who arrived wearing a khimar by asking if she was a Muslim.

                When the apartment seeker ? Fatma Farghaly ? replied that she was a Muslim, Greda declared that he did not rent to Muslims and asked her to leave.

                1. Actually you can still absolutely discriminate on the basis of religion. The thing you’re not allowed to do is tell the person that you’re using their religion as the basis for discrimination.

                  Just lie and it’s perfectly legal.

                  It’s one reason why ‘thought crimes’ are so easy to evade.

                2. Are you asking for an example of a landlord being prevented from discriminating on the basis of religion?

                  ZZZIIIIINNNGGG go the goalposts!

                  Here’s what you actually wrote:

                  I don’t understand what bearing that has on infringing on a landlord’s freedom to exclude Mormons from his property.

                  Any examples of this actually happening?

        2. Transgender discrimination is sex discrimination, already barred by Title 7 of the Civil Rights Act, the Fair Housing Act, and others.

          1. Yes. If we pretend that “gender” equals “sex” sometimes, but other times it totally doesn’t. Also, you’re argument has not been sustained by the majority of courts

          2. Of course, if transgender is a thing than sex and gender discrimination is something that literally can not exist at all.

            Hmm…are you sure you want to pursue that line of logic?

        3. Not sure why people insist on using the oxymoron “progressive libertarian”.

          There is no such thing under current definitions.

          1. Because they want to slur people who care about freedom for those outside the majority.

            1. You care about conservatives? Odd, it has never seemed that way at all.

  26. OT: The Queen of Soul has left us. She has now gone to eternal rest. God Bless her soul. Dead at 76.

    1. I Can’t Get No Satisfaction….

      RIP Aretha.

    2. That is a real tragedy.

      1. the only good thing about her death is the media will focus on that today instead of Trump, unless they can think of a way to blame Trump for her death

        1. Don’t give Mueller’s Fishing Expedition LLC any ideas!

  27. Long live the Queen of Soul.

    1. Think

      Cause freedom stands for freedom
      Oh freedom, yeah freedom right now
      Freedom, oh freedom
      Give me some freedom, oh freedom

  28. Seems the whole twitters and deplatforming thing has a very easy solution. You start editing for content, boom, no Section 230 immunity for you. Done.
    Is there some reason this existing solution wouldn’t work?

    1. Billions of dollars for lobbying against any change in that short-sighted law.

      But no, it would be the best solution. Let the civil courts decide on what amounts to fraud and damages to livelihood.

      You only get immunity if you do not moderate at all besides unsolicited advertisements. Reason proves that this can be done.

  29. The purpose of the “national press cabal” is to censor any outlet that is not part of it. So yes it’s very hypocritical. ADL’s Jonathan Greedblatt explains it best: “We need a #freepress today more than ever to ensure credible voices not be silenced.”

  30. Plumb’s “religious beliefs include a strict adherence to a code of health which precludes the consumption and possession of mind-altering drugs, substances and chemicals, which includes cannabis and its various derivatives,” the complaint states.

    No, they don’t.

    I grew up LDS. I can assure each and every one of you that the LDS church does not have proscriptions against taking medicine.

    They’re even allowed to drink the demon alcohol in things like, y’know, cough syrup.

    1. Maybe he’s not Orthodox Mormon. He might be D.A.R.E. Mormon, which is like regular Mormonism only they’re fixated on stopping drug usage and they don’t actually work.

  31. You’re fucking libertarians. You could at least not equivocate when it comes to the president attacking the press like a fucking fascist. I can only imagine what Trump cocksucking is going on in the comments. Let me see…

    1. Aw, geez, Past Me, you’re really still not over him? Man, I completely forgot about being this hungover from that breakup.

      It gets better, Past Me. Trust me.

      Also he dies from a heart attack brought on by consuming an overly-potent speedball, so we dodged a bullet there.

    2. Wake me up when there’s a head on a pike.

      1. One wants to preempt fascist takeovers.

        1. not if heads on pikes are in play

          1. Tony will take his pikes up the ass.

        2. If I have to choose between liberals and fascists, I’ll take the fascists. Fascists may leave you with a fucked up country, but at least you’ll still have a country.

          By the time the liberals are done with us we won’t even have that.

        3. Tony|8.16.18 @ 10:52AM|#
          “One wants to preempt fascist takeovers.”

          Letty assholes pretend losing an election is a ‘fascist takeover’, right?

        4. One wants to preempt fascist takeovers.

          Yes, that’s what Trump’s doing by keeping everyone aware that the press is already working, day and night, for the fascists who are seeking to destroy this country.

          He’s trying to pre-empt total capitulation to the left.

    3. president attacking the press like a fucking fascist.

      you mean dissing them on twitter? those poor babies

      1. Yes they are the sensitive little babies.

        Also Trump is just the greatest president of all time–nay the greatest imaginable–and they are shamefully getting in the way of his greatness.

        1. It’s entirely possible to criticize the leftist media for being whiny douchebags who can’t separate fascism from fascism (you know, like when people are called nasty names vs. when people are shot), and not be fellating our boor in chief at the same time.

        2. Trump is the best president in over 100 years.

          More and more Americans feel that way and makes you very upset.

          1. If by “more and more” you mean “fewer and fewer” and by “100” you mean “1,” sure.

            1. Yeah, I meant best president in 101 years. thanks.

    4. I have yet to see the professional media complainers on the right give any indication of what they would rather see instead of the Washington Post.

      A Washington Post that is somehow compelled to “tell the truth”? Who decides what is truth? And who does the compulsion?

      Close down Washington Post entirely? Then in its place we would just have a bunch of Breitbarts and Salons instead. Would that really be better?

      1. no ones calling for closing down any one, what we would like to see is truth in advertising. don’t tell us your the truth teller when you are playing sides. I would respect them if they came out and said we are a leftist believing organization. this TDS just for stupid things like two scoopes of ice cream all the way to removing security clearance from former disgruntled employies is just plain silly and everyone sees through it

      2. You kicked the shit out of that strawman

      3. A Washington Post that is somehow compelled to “tell the truth”? Who decides what is truth? And who does the compulsion?

        The Washington Post isn’t being compelled to do anything you half wit. They can print whatever they like. Their problem is that no one is compelled to read it much less believe any of it.

      4. The Washington Post’s slogan is “Democracy dies in darkness!”

        Is it too much to ask that they tone down the drama queen bullshit? Or at least be a little more interesting? They sound worse than a Star Wars prequel.

        1. “Thank you, Obi Wan. You’re our only hope.”

      5. The ‘professional media complainers’ have repeatedly requested news services that report what is happening–not what they want to happen.

        Editorial shows that are separate from news shows.

        Commentary that is not informed by political bias but by what actually happened/is happening.

        Why is this so hard?

    5. Every time Trump does something that makes sense, he gets called a fascist. Those fascist guys sure must have been real smart! Perhaps we should try to learn from their example!

      1. Uncle Adolf’s Gas and Grill…..

    6. Fascist? How many subpoenas and wiretaps did your hero Zero put on reporters?

    7. The last president wiretapped journalists. The “outcry” was muted, at best.

      I’m not defending the president for behaving like a clown, I’m attacking journalists for being clowns

    8. If you’ll notice carefully, politicians attack the media all the time.

      They only pearl clutch for Trump dramatically because victimhood is all the rage, and they need to grab a slice.

      1. If you’ll notice carefully, politicians attack the media all the time.

        Hell, we have sportsball players going after the media, but somehow that’s not a direct threat to democracy.

    9. “I can only imagine ”

      We know, it’s how you arrive at all of your conclusions

    10. You could at least not equivocate when it comes to the president attacking the press like a fucking fascist.

      Does attacking the press make Jalen Ramsey a fascist?

    11. Show me where he has attacked the press with anything other than his speech in a way that is different than any administration in the past 50 years.

      Free speech for me but not for thee.

  32. Platforms as the new feudal lands. This guy gets it.

    http://thezman.com/wordpress/?p=14758

    1. Read it this morning.

      I enjoy reading him, but he has a habit of making some goofy / ill-informed statements concerning libertarianism and markets.

    2. Interesting take on deplatforming.

      Libertarians are for less regulation, so the solution is to gut banking regulations so much that new banks can easily open up that cater to all business, not just Lefty business.

      1. Agreed.

  33. CaseLabs President: Tariffs Drove Us Out of Business

    CaseLabs, the California-based PC case maker with a reputation for premium build quality, announced on Saturday that it will be closing its doors permanently. Additionally, it won’t be able to ship its entire backlog of existing orders.

    The company made the announcement on social media, including Facebook and Twitter, as well as on the top of its website. CaseLabs wrote that ” [w]e have been forced into bankruptcy and liquidation,” and suggested that “[t]he tariffs have played a major role raising prices by almost 80% (partly due to associated shortages), which cut deeply into our margins.” Additionally, the statement mentions the “default of a large account.”

    https://goo.gl/qQp1Lb

    MAGA! DERP!! BLOOP!! BENGHAZI!!!!!!! PIZZA RING!! MAGA!!!!!!

    1. “Additionally, the statement mentions the “default of a large account.”

      So an account defaulted and the business relying on them went bankrupt, and the owner saw a chance to blame Trump.

      How are you still this stupid?

      1. Great minds…
        And then we have turd who posts first and then never does get around to reading the link sent to him by some other TDS-afflicted ignoramus.

    2. Turd, it’s always a good idea to read the link before you post, you lying piece of shit:

      “CaseLabs wrote that ” [w]e have been forced into bankruptcy and liquidation,” and suggested that “[t]he tariffs have played a major role raising prices by almost 80% (partly due to associated shortages), which cut deeply into our margins.” Additionally, the statement mentions the “default of a large account.”
      So someone is ‘suggesting’ that tariffs had an effect, but the fact of “default of a large account” is secondary? An idiot like you would believe that.

      And then:
      “The company closure could mean the loss of more than a dozen US jobs.”
      Pick them cherries, turd; it’s all you got.

      1. Obviously, he didn’t even do a good job of picking his cherries…

        What he did was more dopey than dastardly.

  34. “The lawsuit takes issue with a provision of the ballot measure that would prevent landlords from not renting to a medical marijuana cardholder, saying that could create an issue of Mormon property owners being forced into renting to people who use cannabis. ”

    I wonder if this guy refuses to rent to people who use tobacco, alcohol, coffee and tea as well. If not, then his lawsuit is complete garbage.

  35. “The lawsuit takes issue with a provision of the ballot measure that would prevent landlords from not renting to a medical marijuana cardholder, saying that could create an issue of Mormon property owners being forced into renting to people who use cannabis.”

    There’s an obvious, simple and correct solution to this issue. And it will never happen.

  36. In other news, the LP candidate for US Senate in Virginia is polling at 5%, and is getting 10% of GOP voters…
    https://goo.gl/C4muTG

    As the battle between the sadsack Tim Kaine and the turd Corey Stewart intensifies, his numbers will probably go up

    1. Doubtful. Virginia has become Illinois; a large urban population of the worst sorts of SJW retards outvoting the rest of the state. Kaine is a known commodity. The voters of Virginia are supporting him because Kaine, as retarded as he is, is who they are and who they want. They are not going to switch to the LP candidate.

      Stewart is a terrible candidate as well. The difference is that in Virginia you can be a retard and still win elections as long as you are a Democrat because the voters in NOVA who determine such things don’t care and in fact prefer their Democrats to be crazy and retarded. Virginia is worse than Maryland. Maryland will occasionally have enough and kick the Democrats out. Virginia seems incapable of that.

      1. Do you think Virginia is that bad?

        My top progressive nightmare states are:

        California
        New York
        Illinois
        Massachusetts
        Maryland
        Connecticut
        Oregon
        New Jersey

        Should Virginia be added to the list?

        Of course, you could throw in Vermont.

        1. No, we are still removed from that list. But when amazon moves here you might as well add us.

        2. I think it is getting close. It is becoming like every other NE state. If you go to Maryland outside of Baltimore and DC, it is a very conservative and pretty level headed place. The same is true of New York outside of NYC. Virginia is a pretty conservative southern state outside of the two college towns of C’ville and Blacksburg and NOVA. But those areas are able to outvote the rest of the state in statewide elections. So it might as well be Massachusetts at this point.

          1. There is a state representative, Geoff Diehl, who is poised to win the Massachusetts GOP nomination for senator and do battle against Lizzie Warren.

            This guy is not a RINO like Scott Brown whom Warren beat in 2012.

            Of course, its Massachusetts. But Diehl will not campaign as a RINO and he has already been pounding the fake Cherokee for months.

            1. Glen Reynolds at instapundit makes the valid point that state governments were destroyed by Baker v. Carr. Baker v. Carr ruled geographic representation as unconstitutional under the one man one vote rule. Before Baker v. Carr, state Senates were like the US Senate and based on geography instead of population. This gave rural areas influence over the state government. After Baker v. Carr, state Senates were just versions of state Houses and rural areas lost all voice in the state government in places like Massachusetts or Maryland and are now effectively ruled like colonies of their state’s urban centers. The decision is largely to blame for state governments in the Northeast going full on retard prog.

              1. Some constitutional law professors cover Baker v. Carr, others don’t.

                My first year professor did not. I remember that because this knucklehead who flunked his first year was in my class and he asked the prof why he wasn’t covering the case. The knucklehead flunked again. His parents must have been thrilled with him.

      2. Debatable over which state, Virginia or Maryland, is more retarded. Maryland has elected GOP governors twice in the past 15 years and Larry Hogan is pretty popular, but he is an exception, and the rest of the state is bluer than a monk’s balls. If #Resist has their way, their zombies will turn out in full force to vote against him-MD has not re-elected a GOP governor since Theodore McKeldin in the 1950s, so history is not on Hogan’s side. Of course, all that matters to Team Blue is to elect one of their own, and could care less the damage that one party rule is doing to the state.

        In Virginia, the GOP still narrowly controls the assembly and senate, which has kept the dems from going full progtard. That will probably change after the elections next year and might be what needs to happen for the wealthy progtards in NoVa to come to their senses

        1. You know your home state better than me, but, is it not fair to say that Virginia has gotten bluer and more progressive in recent years?

          1. Yes, it has become a lot bluer, mostly because of the transplants from NY, NJ, and Mass. plus a few Californians who have invaded Northern Virginia. The rest of the state remains deeply red. The dems have been winning statewide offices for the past 10 years or so, but the GOP still controls the state assembly, so stuff like gun restrictions and huge tax hikes haven’t happened-yet

        2. When have wealthy progs ever come to their senses? I find Maryland to be a saner state than Virginia. Montgomery County is no worse than what NOVA has become. And the places outside of DC and Baltimore or nowhere near as crazy redneck as Virginia. Maryland elects a Republican governor now and then because as bad as the MD GOP are, they at least are not run by lunatic evangelicals like the NOVA GOP is and can come up with candidates who are not complete morons like Cuccineli or whatever his name was and Stewart is. Virginia is increasingly becoming a choice between the worst kinds of SJW Progs and the worst kinds of backwoods evangelicals. It is just a nightmare.

          1. I agree-I think the VA GOP needs to hit rock bottom before it will quit the culture war stuff. But if the SJWs really take over the dem party here, and pass a huge tax hike, the dems could lose power pretty quickly here, since their voters are mostly wealthy Northern Virginians who don’t actually want to give more money to the government.

            1. The other thing that could bring the rich progs to their senses is the Democrat love of illegal aliens and criminals. Let Louden and Fairfax country become unsafe and those wealthy progs will suddenly decide law and order really matters. I could see them electing someone like a Guilliani type if the crime rate gets bad enough, which it will if they are not careful.

              1. Let Louden and Fairfax country become unsafe and those wealthy progs will suddenly decide law and order really matters

                MS-13 has been in Loudon and Fairfax for at least a decade now and committed some truly heinous murders-they even left a severed head at a playground near where I live. This has not had any effect on how people vote-if anything, the democrats they elect have been the opposite of law and order recently.

                As for the illegal aliens, many of them work for the wealthy progs as landscapers or nannies.

                1. But MS13 is just killing other immigrants. Let them kill a respectable white person and the white progs in NOVA would see it entirely differently.

  37. What’s that I smell?

    Could that be the ripe smell of HI-POCK-RIS-Y wafting up from the unwashed who couldn’t hack getting a real degree so they went to Journalism School?

  38. >>>More than 300 U.S. newspapers

    cried for mercy

  39. The school district blacked out sensitive portions of the report only before posting it online, leaving the underlying data intact?a “method [that] made it possible for anyone to read the blacked-out portions by copying and pasting them into another file.”

    *facepalm* Hoisted by their own retards. Not that I would expect anything else from public school bureaucrats.


  40. More than 300 U.S. newspapers ran Thursday editorials that “call for an end to President Trump’s sustained assault” on the press.

    Where were these chuckleheads when the Obama administration was spying on journalists and locking them up? Oh, right, they were fellating him.

    ‘Assault on free speech’ loses a whole lot of it’s meaning when the prior administration was literally doing the things they accuse Trump of doing, which notably he himself has not done. Questioning the press and calling them out is perfectly valid, yes even by a U.S. President. It’s when he starts locking them up and closing their papers that they should really be concerned, and there are zero signs that he’s intent on even trying such a thing.

    It seems to me that ‘the Press’ is really saying ‘stop pushing back on our narratives and let yourself get impeached’ rather than it having anything to do with the free press.

    That’s not necessarily a defense of Trump, but rather an indictment of the ‘free press’ I think.

    1. Trump has not taken a single concrete action that could be described as restricting the media. Obama, in contrast, had his DOJ throw reporters in jail and actively spy on journalists who criticized him. Trump’s sin as you point out is contradicting the media’s preferred narrative and not losing with honor the way the media thinks all Republicans should.

      One of the many lies the media tells is that they believe in a free press. That is bullshit. The media would like nothing better than to be a state-run media and get the security and prestige that comes with that. The last thing they want is a free press. Life as a journalist in a free society is hard and unpredictable. Life as a journalist in an unfree society is easy as long as you are willing to go along with the party line. A comfortable life spreading propaganda is what all of them want. Don’t let their claims to believe in freedom fool you.

      1. Yeah. I mean, honestly I do find Trump distasteful in a lot of ways but what pisses me off is that people attack him for things that I criticized Obama for yet during the prior administration the Press was crickets.

        They’ll have to forgive me for not believing them when they say they’re standing on principle now after watching them shed all principles for far, far longer than the last 8 years.

        Simply recalling what they did to Romney, who I found to be one of the least energetic and interesting Republican candidates in my lifetime, was revealing. If you can call a milquetoast jackass like Romney Hitler and racist, than those words no longer have any meaning. The fact he was attacked for his Russia comments is truly mind bending given Democrat attitudes just a short 4 or 5 years later.

        1. I can’t stand Romney but if the media will call him a racist and worse, and they did, they will call any Republican that. It never occurs to them that they ended up with a Republican President who is so nasty to them because they created an environment where only a Republican who was could win.

    2. The only actual assaults on free speech I’ve seen lately are by leftists using physical violence to quash speech they don’t like. I don’t see how a scornful tweet even comes close to that.

      1. Violent mobs showing up at speeches on college campuses and making it impossible for people to be heard is of no concern to the free press loving media. Trump saying mean things about them on Twitter, is like the worst thing ever!!

    3. More and more Americans are fully aware that most of the Parade of Horribles that the media used as an excuse for TDS.

      It makes the media madder and madder that Trump is doing well as President.

  41. My local paper joined the pile-on too. No “fake news” has every been printed! OK, I’ll cut them some slack since I’m not going to go back through 2 years of their archives. But the problem isn’t so much “fake news” as it is slanted news, spun news, and lack of dissenting views. They canned Stossel and added two or three liberal (or worse) columnists. They fail to run “letters” that contradict gushing reports about what some local legislators plan to do, they don’t call on opposing groups to comment, they allow A.P. reports to smuggle in demeaning or snarky words about Republicans in so-called news reports. They regularly violate their “letters” policy on length of submission to run “essays” that are partisan and reject opposing views where readers stuck to the policy.

    1. My local paper joined the pile-on too.

      In all probability your “local newspaper” is owned by one of the quite small number of large media conglomerates which own virtually all of the newspapers in this country.

      Advance Publications, perhaps. Or Gannett ….

  42. “””Our role is to serve as a check on government,” the Chicago Tribune declares. “The president ought to get used to it.”””

    Did they wake up after 8 years?

    1. Vic,

      They are so stupid they think people didn’t notice. It is just mindboggling how stupid and arrogant they are.

    2. Their role changed in 2016 from being a lap-dog.

      1. Now they’re the annoying dog that barks at everything, from squirrels to burglars.

        1. TUNA ON WHITE HOUSE MENU IS “VERY CONCERNING,” EXPERTS SAY

          TUNA WAS GOOD WHEN IT WAS ON THE MENU UNDER PREVIOUS ADMINISTRATIONS, BUT NOW IT’S BAD

          QUESTIONS PERSIST ON WHETHER THE TUNA SENDS THE RIGHT MESSAGE

          (Meanwhile Trump signed a budget bill which increased the national debt – coming up, did he disrespect courageous maverick John McCain when signing the bill?)

          1. Remember Earth Tones? Obama’s tan suit?

            1. Tan suit? Racist!

  43. Hot off of calling for more social-media censorship and supporting destructive speech regulations like FOSTA, newspaper editors would like you to know that Donald Trump’s dissing of the news media makes them sad.

    Well played, ENB, well played.

  44. “Our role is to serve as a check on government,” the Chicago Tribune declares. “The president ought to get used to it.”

    LOL! Do journalists really believe this?

    1. Hmmm. Let’s see.

      Gulf of Tonkin Incident…
      WMD in Iraq…
      Obama’s Secret “Due Process” Kill Orders…
      Satan Worship in Daycare Centers…
      The Unquestioned Guilt of the Central Park 5 and the Duke Lacrosse Players, because the Prosecutors in each case held press conferences and said that they were guilty…

      Yes indeed, Trib. Great checking on government. Them bastards couldn’t sneak these by you.

  45. criticizing the press isn’t an “assault” on them and neither is persuading people to ignore their biased and outright false reporting. They can piss off and try to earn our trust and respect instead of whining about why they don’t have it automatically.

    1. Nothing says “free society” like having a class of people with control over all of the information and who are above any criticism. That is what the media wants to create.

  46. The traditional media isn’t the enemy, they’re just barely clinging to relevance.

  47. “More than 300 U.S. newspapers ran Thursday editorials that “call for an end to President Trump’s sustained assault” on the press” organized by the Boston Globe.

    Hold on a sec…I seem to remember that, about two months ago, another profit-making media corporation organized a coordinated same-day expression of editorial opinion. And it was treated as a existential threat to American democracy. Members of Congress, editorial boards, and the entire Twitterverse were outraged. Things are different now?

  48. Those 300 newspapers are all owned by ten companies, including Scripps, Gannett, Advance Publications, and a few others. They’re trying to create the illusion that they represent some sort of broad based movement when the truth is that they represent a very small (but very powerful and very vocal) faction.

    1. ^ This. If you want to look at an industry that’s conglomerated to the point where it is able to speak with virtually one voice, Newspapers and yes even Television are great examples of it.

      In fact, throughout the history of mass media outlets have been mouthpieces for owners, and were often created for that explicit purpose.

      That they try to pretend today that things are somehow different is hilarious. It never changed. Not for even one day. The fact that some of these media companies have occasionally released news is entirely tangential to their raison d’?tre.

      Note that obviously I’m not saying this applies to all outlets. That would be absurd. Simply that it’s true for essentially any major outlet. Hell, it applies to Reason while we’re on the topic. You think the Koch brothers just wanted to create a publication for the hell of it? Absolutely not.

  49. “Our role is to serve as a check on government”

    They don’t seem remotely interested in “acting as a check on government”. I never see them acting as a check on the criminal behavior at the IRS, DOJ, FBI etc. They don’t act as a check on the judiciary, or on the legislature, They never once acted as a check on the president while Obama was in the White House.

    They are not interested in acting as a check on government, they simply wish to destroy Trump … who happens to be the first person in a long time to attempt to impose some checks on government. Rather than acting as a check on government, the press acts as governments advocate and protector.

  50. Sinclair Media has its newscasters read the same editorial, and it’s the end of democracy as we know it. 300 newspapers write an editorial based on the same script, and it’s freedom of the press.

    1. Sinclair made it seem like it was the reporter’s words. Bad journalism and misleading.

      These editorials were from the editors.

      1. Sinclair made it seem like it was the reporter’s words. Bad journalism and misleading.

        So whether something is true or not is dependent on whether the reporter saying it really means it or is reading a script?

        WTF difference does that make. There is nothing misleading about Sinclair news. Are you really so fucking stupid that when you read something in the paper or see it on the TV News you believe it because the reporter does and not because there are factual reasons to believe it is true?

        That is the dumbest fucking argument I have seen in a long time. If Sinclair says something that is not true, don’t believe it. Maybe that is why you want a state-run and controlled media so badly. You think everyone is as gullible and stupid as you appear to be.

        1. Your ignorance is not my stupidity.

          Journalism should make clear where the source of the words comes from. Sinclair did not do this. They could have prefaced the script with a disclaimer that the words were written by the company, not the reporter.

          Business and editorial should have a firewall.

          1. Business and editorial should have a firewall.

            You live in a fantasy world if you think that the Trump bashing press has a “firewall” between its “news” and it’s opinion.

            1. There’s no firewall between news and editorial.
              There should be a firewall between business and news.
              Sinclair does not have that.

              1. There’s no firewall between news and editorial.
                There should be a firewall between business and news.
                Sinclair does not have that.

                If you think that’s not the case with these other news orgs, you’re delusional.

          2. Journalism should make clear where the source of the words comes from. Sinclair did not do this.

            Yes they do. You are talking about two different things. If they say “Donald Trump said X”, then yes that has to be right. But if they say “I think X”, it means exactly jack and shit whether it is the reporters view or the companies view. If the reporter is saying it, it is the company’s position and it doesn’t really matter what the reporter thinks. Do you really think that people are going around saying “that reporter on Sinclair said this so it must be true and what they believe”?

            There really isn’t any Prog talking point, no matter how stupid that you won’t believe and repeat.

            1. You really have no clue how news is supposed to work?
              If a journalist is given a script, it is not what he thinks. It’s misleading.

              Each editorial board in this case wrote what they think. They were not forced to.

              1. Each editorial board in this case wrote what they think. They were not forced to.

                No standards like double standards, eh?

              2. But the guys the run the presses were forced to print those words, so, it is blatant dishonesty somehow under your logic

              3. So the fact that all these editors arrived at the same conclusion at the same time independent of Gannett and Scripps is coincidence

              4. You think news anchors are not reading off a script someone wrote for them?

          3. You mean like the Journolist did? Or when CNN solicited and used DNC talking points? That kind of clarity?

            1. Every time one of you regurgitates stale Alex Jones horseshit, an angel is raped by Hitler.

                1. Want a list of all the various collusions between FOX News and the Republican party?

                  1. One whole network vs dozens of Lefty networks.

          4. Absolutely no one thinks a TV foof reading from a prompter wrote the copy

      2. Sinclair made it very obvious that they were reading scripted material.

        These editorials were designed to each look a little different–as if widely divergent peoples had suddenly had the idea to perform some coordinated act at the same time. And not as if they’d colluded to unperson Alex Jon—wait–their response to being taken to task for colluding is to collude even more? And more openly?

        Do they even bother trying to hide anything anymore?

  51. Our role is to serve as a check on government

    No surprise that the DeRps here are viewing this in purely partisan terms. And maybe journalists have been drinking a bit too much of their own pee to take this seriously.

    But what if there’s still some truth to that? Isn’t that also kind of the libertarian ideal – and a very powerful ally? What would be the best way to get journalists to serve as a check on govt?

    IMO – maybe one way would be to distribute federal functions around the country – rather than concentrating it in DC/burbs. Concentrated – the only watchdog CAN be the big media (WaPo, NYT, etc) and they clearly drink their own partisan pee. Distributed – there’s a lot of ways that local media could watchdog a local federal function – and uniquely compete to get their own story out – and cooperate/syndicate when the story gets bigger than a single location.

    1. Sure there is some truth to it. The problem is the media is doing the opposite. They are not a check on the government. At best they are a check on Trump. Forgetting for a moment the media’s spending 8 full years acting as a state-run media for Obama, even under Trump they are not checking the government. If they were checking the government, they wouldn’t be acting as a PR firm for the FBI and Intel community because they think it will hurt Trump. Sorry, any group of people running around claiming some shit bag like John Brennen is a “great public servant” is not acting as a check on the government.

      The media loves the government. They have this symbiotic relationship with Washington whereby the people in a government leak the media stories and in return the media acts as a PR firm for whoever is feeding them the information. Whether it be convicting anyone who is arrested before they ever go to court or repeating whatever talking point the FBI or intel community wants the country to believe, or lying to justify any government program no matter how stupid and wasteful, the media is never a check on the government. It is practically an arm of it. The fact that they all hate the current chief exectutive of the government doesn’t change that fact.

      1. They weren’t exactly ferocious in checking the abuses of the Bush admin. either. Maybe they don’t like Trump because he’s a monumental disaster. Are you even paying attention to reality? Do you honestly think that the daily psychodrama of a severely mentally unbalanced man is a proper use of your tax dollars? Is this a normal presidency to you? Is it a good one? I realize you don’t read anything that isn’t right-wing horseshit, but just look at the goddamn world with your eyes for fuck’s sake. This shit is insane.

        1. Do you honestly think that the daily psychodrama of a severely mentally unbalanced man is a proper use of your tax dollars?

          Obama isn’t President anymore dude.

          1. See that doesn’t work as a joke or in any other way because Obama was clearly a very sane and rational and calm person, especially compared to the senile orange toddler who took his place.

            1. Obama is a narcissistic sociopath.

              1. Well thank god we replaced him with a jovial, empathetic altruist.

                1. Trump does like America.

                  1. He doesn’t like anything. He scrapes by on the unsatisfying but vital dopamine rushes he gets when someone praises him–and the pathetic reassurances he tweets to himself.

            2. Yet Trump beat your queen, Hillary.

              She must have been really shitty since you think Trump is shitty.

  52. “Our role is to serve as a check on government,” the Chicago Tribune declares.

    If they performed this role they wouldn’t be widely reviled. But whenever Democrats are in office they function as Praetorians so everyone knows this is bunk. Ezra Klein is rich now because the media believes he showed them they could be more openly supportive of Democrats / the left without paying too high a price.

    Somewhat amusingly even though that price is now being exacted they still don’t understand they are paying it.

    1. Ezra Klein is rich because he heads a very successful business. I thought only the socialists were jealous of other people’s success?

      1. Klein is great. Probably my favorite thing he’s written is It’s time to admit Hillary Clinton is an extraordinarily talented politician. It’s a little over two years old, but it holds up remarkably well.

        #StillWithHer

        1. She has won more votes than any other human being in American history save Barack Obama.

          1. She has won more votes than any other human being in American history save Barack Obama.

            Untrue. Kim Kardashian has been upvoted more times than any other human being alive. But if you want to talk about only votes that matter, then Kim Kardashian has been upvoted more times than any other human being alive.

          2. Exactly. And that means she won more votes than any white male in history ? particularly impressive given the way the patriarchy opposed her candidacy at every turn.

            Hilariously, I’ve heard people try to argue that, for example, Ronald Reagan’s performances in presidential elections are more impressive than Clinton’s. Um, helloooooooo? Ronald Reagan was a white male! That means Clinton got more total votes than he did, while contending with Russian hacking, a biased media, and institutional misogyny.

            1. Institutional misogyny that tears down an exceptionally qualified woman in exchange for a senile reality TV joke–or that lauds the equally senile monkey’s costar.

              1. The electoral college is institutional misogyny.

                You crack me up sometimes Tony.

                And claiming Hillary was qualified for anything and hadn’t fucked up literally every job she had ever had in her life going back to the Rose Law Firm is an oldie but a goodie. I like your new stuff but sometimes it is good to hear the classics.

                1. I just wish you weren’t such a useless sucker, John. Could you try reading news from somewhere legitimate? Like just for a day?

              2. Tell me about it.

                Besides the obvious help Drumpf got from Russia, it was unconscionable the way our supposedly “liberal media” acted as an arm of the Republican Party in 2016. Hyping the e-mail non-story was bad enough. But there was obvious sexism in the endless speculation about Hillary’s physical health. I could not believe how many times they replayed that video of her minor fainting incident at the 9 / 11 memorial.

                1. B-
                  OBL. You still have a ways to go to equal tony. He just makes it look so natural.

          3. Tony, good thing the popular vote won Hillary the election.

  53. “Our role is to serve as a check on government,” the Chicago Tribune declares. “The president ought to get used to it.”

    No, your role is to honestly report the news.

    But if your role actually IS to “serve as a check on gov’t”, please detail all the times you’ve fought to impose “checks” on the Democrats running the IL State gov’t.

    Or the Obama Administration.

    I’ll wait

    “Our democracy is endangered when citizens are persuaded to reject or ignore the professionals who provide news and information,” warns The Athens News in Ohio.

    Our democracy is endangered when citizens trust self-interested and political biased “professionals” to tell them what to believe

    1. If they didn’t report on the misdeeds of the Obama administration, how do you know about them?

      You are the negative consequence of the attacks on journalism these editorials are worried about: stupid citizens who let propagandists tell them what to think.

      Your entire post can be translated to: if journalists aren’t sucking the cock of the Republican party at every turn, they are not doing their job. The problem is the GOP propaganda machine started this decades ago, so there are plenty of victims like you out there. They’re late to the game, if anything, though at least they waited until it was so painfully obvious that the president and his party are attacking truth itself for their own malicious ends, because he says so every day, that even a retard could get it. So what does that make you?

      1. If they didn’t report on the misdeeds of the Obama administration, how do you know about them?

        Because the evil right-wing media did. And even at that, we really don’t know about the full extent of them. Every day it seems Judicial Watch wins another FOIA lawsuit and more of the truth is revealed.

        You are the negative consequence of the attacks on journalism these editorials are worried about: stupid citizens who let propagandists tell them what to think.

        Your complete lack of self-awareness never fails to amaze. If completely lacking self-awareness were an Olympic event, you would be Micheal Phelps.

        The problem is the GOP propaganda machine started this decades ago, so there are plenty of victims like you out there. They’re late to the game, if anything, though at least they waited until it was so painfully obvious that the president and his party are attacking truth itself for their own malicious ends, because he says so every day, that even a retard could get it. So what does that make you?

        So you admit that the media functions as a leftwing propaganda machine but think that is okay because the GOP has a “propaganda machine” too. Okay. At least you admit the media is a leftwing propaganda machine. That is something.

        1. Judicial Watch is a conservative activist group, not a fact-checking organization. How do you not know this? You do know the difference between an agenda-driven outfit and news reporting?

          Of course you fucking don’t. FOX news and Limbaugh have been beating into your head that all mainstream sources of information are biased against you. And you fell for it.

          That’s every major newspaper and all major international radio, print, and broadcast sources. But only Glenn Beck has the truth. That’s what you believe. Even the fucking Queen is in on the conspiracy against you.

      2. Tony admits that the media is largely a propaganda tool of the Left.

        1. Tony admits that the left values facts and the right does not.

        2. Tony admits that the Left ignores science, facts, and reality.

  54. Uh oh, no guilty verdict in the Manafort trial.

    The longer it takes, the less likely a guilty verdict will be returned by the jury.

    Everyone know that a jury takes an initial vote for guilt. So its almost a certainty that at least one juror voted non guilty.

    1. You aren’t required to support Paul Manafort, you know. What is it with you? You’re the most blindly tribal person here, and that’s saying a fucking lot. A normal person would take his credibility and run as far from the likes of Manafort as he can get.

    2. Manafort was acquitted on all charges!

  55. lol @ people calling HuffPo a news publication. It’s a blog. It’s not a news publication. Stop citing to it as some example of unbiased news or authority source. It’s full of bias because it’s a blog, not a news publication. Nobody who works there is a journalist. Journalists work at WSJ, WP, NYT, etc and have editorial standards.

    1. To be fair, there are almost no journalists at NYT, WaPo….

      They are Lefty propganada hacks who have zero standards of integrity.

  56. Maybe if the media weren’t so obviously biased, and obviously pushing a singular agenda… People wouldn’t think it was biased and pushing an agenda?

    With the views that they are pushing, THEY ARE the enemies of freedom loving Americans. Half+ of the country has known this for a long time, and the fact that the president finally started calling them on their bullshit came as no surprise, since they mostly already knew it anyway. If the media ever went back to being even remotely objective I’m quite sure people would begin to have a little more respect for them again…

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.