The Rose Garden and White House happenings: Listening to voters’ concerns
mtierney said:
WOW! Jim and db have it all figured out! Only their POVs, their opinions, their news sources are worth consideration. No need for elections, just select a few like-minded folks to pick someone who agree with them!
“Democracy is a system of government in which state power is vested in the people or the general population of a state. According to the United Nations, democracy "provides an environment that respects human rights and fundamental freedoms, and in which the freely expressed will of people is exercised." Wikipedia
Only liberal progressives would openly support a system of government (or community chatline) which avoids hearing/reading conflicting life experiences, opinions, or beliefs of fellow human beings/neighbors/conservatives. Why do you suppose they feel so threatened?
Why do the polls show so many Americans questioning the direction of the Biden Administration?
I believe it is ignorant — and dangerous —to promote or endorse a closed mind. One-sided conversations usually end up — here for sure — with Boys Club infighting.
I may hold my nose often while I read a variety of newspapers and periodicals, watch CNN, MSNBC, and have been a lifelong PBS supporter and viewer. The recent revelations by a NPR editor of how our tax dollars are being used, makes me queasy, however. Especially so, as April 15 looms!
I have no idea if you even have a point with this response.
I suppose you're with the side that thinks the election was stolen.
I'm more than happy to discuss any recent video from your party's leader - I'll watch the whole thing and we can have a rational conversation on it's merits- fair? Just post any recent rally speech.
mtierney said:
WOW! Jim and db have it all figured out! Only their POVs, their opinions, their news sources are worth consideration. No need for elections, just select a few like-minded folks to pick someone who agree with them!
...
you actually have no idea what a fact is anymore, do you.
not that you ever did, for that matter.
mtierney said:
No need for elections, just select a few like-minded folks to pick someone who agree with them!
Reminder - it is you who support the party that does not believe in elections. Donald Trump attempted to nullify an election, and the Republican party supports him.
mtierney said:
From the WSJ TODAY…
“Former CIA director John Brennan briefed this material to President Barack Obama, Vice President Joe Biden, Attorney General Loretta Lynch and Mr. Comey, yet the FBI ignored it. It did the same when it learned that collusion dossier author Christopher Steele was working for the Clinton campaign and that Mr. Steele and oppo-research team Fusion GPS were spreading disinformation to the press. And it ignored exculpatory statements made by Messrs. Page and [unpaid Trump adviser George Papadopoulos] in secret FBI recordings.“Christopher Steele and Hillary Clinton also do not appear in the new Times report, which spends a lot of the reader’s time warning about the target of the intelligence community’s abuse. The Timesmen write:
“Current and former officials routinely describe Mr. Trump in private conversations as an obvious security threat… They do not trust him to protect national security secrets based on his actions both in office and after leaving it…“But while some former officials fear that Mr. Trump, if elected again, would try to weaken the agencies or undermine their independence by installing loyalists and purging career officials, others are not so sure.“In fact these agencies are not independent, and must never be allowed to operate independently of our democratically elected president if we want to remain free.
“To its credit, the Times does provide some comic relief at the end of its long warning about the alleged Trumpian destruction to come in the intelligence community when it notes the actual results of his presidency:
“…former officials note that during his first administration, Mr. Trump attacked intelligence leaders but did not interfere with intelligence collection. Under Mr. Trump’s second C.I.A. director, Gina Haspel, information-gathering capabilities about Russia appeared to improve, setting the agency up, for example, to warn accurately in early 2022 that Mr. Putin was about to invade Ukraine.“If only Mr. Trump’s successor hadn’t chosen that moment to suggest that Russia might be able to get away with a “minor incursion” without triggering a strong, united response from the U.S. and its allies. Even the NPR gang noticed the colossal blunder by our 46th president.
“Are there any unnamed intelligence officials who might want to warn the Times about the dangers of a second Biden term?”
full story here…
what is this mish mosh supposed to prove?
Let's assume that mtierney is right, and that Biden and the Democrats are terrible, awful, no good, bad for America. Good news -- if enough Americans agree, they can be voted out of office.
But what if Trump's critics are right? If he gets into office, and Americans decide after the fact that they made a mistake, too bad. Trump and his supporters don't care about the results of elections, and they've shown they're willing to take action to make electoral results they oppose irrelevant. If Trump regains office, Jan. 6 won't be the culmination of his attacks on our democracy, but a mere prelude.
Next time mtierney decides to wax on about democracy and free speech and respecting others points of view, she should keep that in mind. Yes, yes, I know -- she's a work in progress, doesn't have all the answers, yadda yadda. But honestly, it doesn't take that much work to grasp the simple facts here -- Trump tried to nullify an election. He's learned from his near-failure, and his odds of overturning future elections he disagrees with should he come to power are high. If someone claims to care about democracy and our constitutional freedoms, they cannot support Trump.
Only on the subject of reconciling the Gospels and Trumpism. Bring that up, and suddenly she's reticent to have an opinion.
neutrality
By Alexandra BruellFollowApril 12, 2024 at 5:30 am ETSAVESHARETEXT1410 RESPONSESListen to articleLength (17 minutes)QueueExplore Audio Center
The New York Times is investigating itself.
Over the past several weeks, Charlotte Behrendt, a top Times editor in charge of probing workplace issues in the newsroom, has summoned close to 20 employees for interviews to determine whether staffers leaked confidential information related to Gaza war coverage to another media outlet.
It is the latest internal crisis at the Times, where management has been at odds with factions of the newsroom over union negotiations and coverage of sensitive topics like the transgender community and social justice.
Reporting about the Gaza war has been a particular flashpoint, especially over an in-depth article that found Hamas weaponized sexual violence in the Oct. 7 attacks on Israel. Some staffers questioned the reporting behind it and alleged that the suffering of Gazans isn’t getting the same attention. Times leaders in March said they stand by the reporting.
The internal probe was meant to find out who leaked information related to a planned podcast episode about that article. But its intensity and scope suggests the Times’s leadership, after years of fights with its workforce over a variety of issues involving journalistic integrity, is sending a signal: Enough.
“The idea that someone dips into that process in the middle, and finds something that they considered might be interesting or damaging to the story under way, and then provides that to people outside, felt to me and my colleagues like a breakdown in the sort of trust and collaboration that’s necessary in the editorial process,” Executive Editor Joe Kahn said in an interview. “I haven’t seen that happen before.”
The Times is the envy of much of the news-publishing world, with more than 10 million paying subscribers and a growing portfolio of products like cooking and games apps. But while its business hums along, the Times’s culture has been under strain.
In many ways, it is a story familiar to companies big and small across America, as bosses struggle to integrate a new generation of workers with different expectations of how their jobs and personal lives should mesh—and whose evolving social values can sow discord in the workplace.
But these tensions have particular resonance at the Times, which has long prided itself as a standard-setter in American journalism. Newsroom leaders, concerned that some Times journalists are compromising their neutrality and applying ideological purity tests to coverage decisions, are seeking to draw a line.
Kahn noted that the organization has added a lot of digital-savvy workers who are skilled in areas like data analytics, design and product engineering but who weren’t trained in independent journalism. He also suggested that colleges aren’t preparing new hires to be tolerant of dissenting views.
“Young adults who are coming up through the education system are less accustomed to this sort of open debate, this sort of robust exchange of views around issues they feel strongly about than may have been the case in the past,” he said, adding that the onus is on the Times to instill values like independence in its employees.
Kahn said he welcomes the normal push and pull of any newsroom—journalists challenging each other’s assumptions and debating whether coverage is fair.
But he said opposition to the Hamas sexual-violence article, penned in late December by veteran correspondent Jeffrey Gettleman and two freelancers, crossed a line when confidential Times work-product was allegedly shared outside the newsroom.
(I will attempt to copy of the WSJ’s look at “mutiny” at The Times — a long article)
part 2
The publisher of the Times, 43-year-old A.G. Sulzberger, says readers’ trust is at risk, however. Some journalists, including at the Times, are criticizing journalistic traditions like impartiality, while embracing “a different model of journalism, one guided by personal perspective and animated by personal conviction,” Sulzberger wrote in a 12,000-word essay last year in Columbia Journalism Review.
Sulzberger greenlighted a “trust team,” a group focused on efforts to improve reader confidence in its reporting. The group is behind features such as disclosures that explain why the Times uses anonymous sources and videos of reporters discussing their work.
Despite such moves, NewsGuard, an organization that rates credibility of news sites, in February reduced the Times’s score from the maximum of 100 to 87.5, saying it doesn’t have a clear enough delineation between news and opinion. “Our standards and processes are among the most robust and rigorous of any news organization in the country,” said a Times spokeswoman. “Nothing has changed in how we label our news and opinion coverage.”
Seed of activism
The current dynamics at the Times stretch back to 2020, when a seed of employee activism took root in the aftermath of George Floyd’s killing. In June of that year, the staff staged a rebellion after the publication of an op-ed piece by Republican senator Tom Cotton, “Send In The Troops,” that suggested the U.S. military should quell riots. Some staffers said it made them feel unsafe.
Within days the Times had parted ways with Editorial Page Editor James Bennet. In a recent account of those events in the Economist, Bennet saidSulzberger supported the decision to publish it, and said he was forced to resign. Sulzberger has said he disputes Bennet’s narrative.
The company said it conducted a review after publishing the op-ed and found “the piece itself and the series of decisions that led to its publication did not hold up to scrutiny,” said a Times spokeswoman.
Jazmine Hughes, a New York Times Magazine writer, who had signed the trans coverage petition and was warned not to do it again, left months later after signing another petition from the activist organization Writers Against the War on Gaza. Hughes resigned “under pressure,” she said in a statement at the time in a union newsletter.
Jake Silverstein, editor-in-chief of the Times’ magazine, described her actions as a “clear violation of The Times’s policy on public protest.”
Divisions have formed in the newsroom over the role of the union that represents Times staffers, the NewsGuild-CWA. Some staffers say it has inappropriately inserted itself into debates with management, including over coverage of the trans community and the war.
While the Guild represents staffers across many major U.S. news outlets, its members also include employees from non-news advocacy organizations such as pro-Palestinian group Jewish Voice For Peace, Democratic Socialists of America and divisions of the ACLU.
When Times staffers logged on to a union virtual meeting last fall to discuss whether to call for a cease-fire in Gaza, some attendees from other organizations had virtual backgrounds displaying Palestinian flags. The meeting, where a variety of members were given around two minutes to share their views on the matter, felt like the kind of rally the Times’ policy prohibits, according to attendees.
Partly in response to such activities, some Times journalists launched an “Independence Caucus” for journalists at the Times and other outlets.
Political project
When it comes to coverage of U.S. politics, the Times has sought to counter the perception that it has a liberal bias. After Donald Trump won the presidency, reporters from the national desk were sent to places where Trump proved popular, like Pittsburgh, Fort Smith, Ark., and eastern Iowa. The Times also held question-and-answer sessions with residents in some of those areas.
The remit was to do deep dives reflecting the points of views of people around the country on topics like immigration and trade, said Trip Gabriel, a reporter on the national desk at the time.
“We were looking to better understand voters or Americans we may have overlooked but also to convince readers we were interested in those peoples’ points of views and people should read the Times in those places,” said Gabriel, who’s currently writing obituaries for the Times.
Kahn said the Times’ national desk now is bigger and more equipped to cover an unprecedented election. The Times will also be more committed to covering misinformation in the 2024 election, with a team of eight to nine people, he said.
In January, Sulzberger shared his thoughts on covering Trump during a visit to the Washington bureau. It was imperative to keep Trump coverage emotion-free, he told staffers, according to people who attended. He referenced the Times story, “Why a Second Trump Presidency May Be More Radical Than His First,”by Charlie Savage, Jonathan Swan and Maggie Haberman, as a good example of fact-based and fair coverage.
Kahn defended the focus the Times, like other outlets, has given to President Biden’s age, despite some concerns from staffers and outsiders.
“What you do is you pursue every story, you follow the facts and you give readers the information they need to make intelligent decisions,” he said.
mteirney - any comment on the t**** rally transcript I LINKED to? What are you thoughts on the election lies being repeated with zero proof - do you love this tactic of constantly lying? It seems to be the secret sauce for the MAGA base. Though he is slipping in the polling. Why do you think that is? T**** was up +2 now he's up +.2.
you post articles - but no comments - do you want to have a discussion about them with any of your thoughts?
Are you getting permission from these publications to repost their content?
https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-speaks-at-rally-in-ohio
I'm tempted to post the whole speech - here's a sample of the quality and content that gets a MAGA attendee excited: - he goes on and on with zero facts.
For your vote, we’re going to take back the Senate, we’re going to win Ohio in November. We’re going to win by a lot. We’re up like 16 or 18 points. I saw one, we’re up 20 points in Ohio and we’re going to look at crooked Joe Biden and we’re going to say, “Joe, you’re fired. Get out of here. You’ve done a terrible job. You’ve done a terrible job. You’ve been a terrible president.” He’s a terrible president. He’s the worst president we’ve ever had. There’s never been a president so bad as this guy. There’s never been anything like it. He’s incompetent. He’s crooked. He doesn’t know what the hell he is doing. Can’t walk off a stage. Can’t put two sentences together. He’s a disaster for our country. I say it. I say it a lot. I used to say five worst presidents, right? Now I say, if you took, and I say it and I think I can go up further, what do you think? Another three or four add, another three, four, or five.
If you took the 10 worst presidents in the history of our country, put them together, they will not have done the damage to our country as this incompetent, crooked guy has done to our country. And that’s what he is. And you know, to be honest, I treated him with more respect than I do now. I don’t treat him with respect because he did this weaponization thing with the DOJ and the FBI. They raided my house and once he did that, I said, “Well, I guess that game is over.” Nobody thought it was possible. In fact, even the lunatics over at CNN and MSDNC, they would say, “Well no, these aren’t crimes. These aren’t crimes.” You fight an election and they end up indicting you because you fought a crooked election.
You ask questions, I see multiple polls that see Biden as a poor choice. The Democrat Party has failed to encourage Biden to bow out gracefully (I know the female president-in-waiting would be dropped out as well) .
jamie said:
you post articles - but no comments - do you want to have a discussion about them with any of your thoughts?
Are you getting permission from these publications to repost their content?
I have been posting long excerpts from the WSJ — to which I subscribe — because MOL posters said they could not open links. Out of the kindness of my heart — this most recent posting, though, was way too time-consuming for me. I usually offer articles which I think are informative and, often express my views far more substantively than I could — notice, you most likely not find an endorsement for Trump in any of them.
Haven't read all of the recent posts, but have to say... there are things about which responsible people and institutions can't be neutral. Factual reporting, fair to both "sides," yes, but no need to pretend opposing prospects are of equal value and consequence.
mtierney said:The Democrat Party has failed to encourage Biden to bow out gracefully (I know the female president-in-waiting would be dropped out as well) .
When you choose to call the Democratic Party the Democrat Party, what is your reason?
DaveSchmidt said:
mtierney said:The Democrat Party has failed to encourage Biden to bow out gracefully (I know the female president-in-waiting would be dropped out as well) .
When you choose to call the Democratic Party the Democrat Party, what is your reason?
this I gotta here
no evil intent or awareness on my part— not that my fans here would believe it…
mtierney said:
no evil intent or awareness on my part— not that my fans here would believe it…
so you're just claiming ignorance and rote recitation of whatever the rest of the Republicans say.
That also explains just about every post you've ever written in this thread.
And not to let you off the hook so easily - anyone with even the most basic understanding of English grammar should realize that this usage is grammatically incorrect. But, like all other forms of the daily cognitive dissonance that Republicans experience, it's just shunted aside.
mtierney said:
no evil intent or awareness on my part— not that my fans here would believe it…
Thank you.
mtierney - please respond to your thoughts on T**** pushing election lies 24/7. Johnson sees Donny and they complain about illegals voting. Can you show the data on how big of an issue this has been?
Then your side has been crying BORDER BORDER BORDER - when there's legislation - your leader say DO NOTHING until I'm back in office. Do you like this stance also?
jamie said:
mtierney - please respond to your thoughts on T**** pushing election lies 24/7. Johnson sees Donny and they complain about illegals voting. Can you show the data on how big of an issue this has been?
Then your side has been crying BORDER BORDER BORDER - when there's legislation - your leader say DO NOTHING until I'm back in office. Do you like this stance also?
Jamie, if I had the answers to all the questions which you frequently ask/demand of me, I would be have guest slots on all the cable news shows and be interviewed in major newspapers and magazines.
One of the reasons the border bill failed, I believe, is that the bill was jammed with a greedy variety of goodies, with the border crisis getting lost in the mix. Please remember Biden did not give the border his attention for three plus years, allowing folks like Mayorkas and Harris get away with saying the border was closed, or under control.
I am not, and most likely never will be, a Trump confidant.
mtierney said:
Jamie, if I had the answers to all the questions which you frequently ask/demand of me, I would be have guest slots on all the cable news shows and be interviewed in major newspapers and magazines.
One of the reasons the border bill failed, I believe, is that the bill was jammed with a greedy variety of goodies, with the border crisis getting lost in the mix. Please remember Biden did not give the border his attention for three plus years, allowing folks like Mayorkas and Harris get away with saying the border was closed, or under control.
I am not, and most likely never will be, a Trump confidant.
time management tip: spend less time looking for stuff to post that few will read and won't engender meaningful discussion, and more time engaging with the rabble.
border question: name one signifant thing in the border bill that was a greedy goodie that was so bad the whole bill had to be thrown out. To say nothing of being so bad the R's were too scared to try and negotiate it out.
You should take a look at the R arguments from our point of view one day. They are truly hilarious. You'll have a blast.
What if the border wall had been completed by Biden? It was to be a physical barrier to show that America was a goal to be achieved by law-abiding immigrants. Biden halted the construction within days after the election, out of spite, and the world saw an “open sesame sign” at the border.
Biden’s vanity and his sense of entitlement brought us the current state of affairs. Just imagine, what would be the state of the nation today if the Wall had been completed and was operational over the last few years? We might be asking ourselves “Trump, who?”
Biden instead focused on freeing millions of students of education debts — but, the covid pandemic has changed America’s young people in many ways. Will they repay Biden for his largesse in November? Or will these voters be bitter and disaffected by the higher education and financial industries which entrapped them — and opt out on Election Day?
mtierney said:
jamie said:
mtierney - please respond to your thoughts on T**** pushing election lies 24/7. Johnson sees Donny and they complain about illegals voting. Can you show the data on how big of an issue this has been?
Then your side has been crying BORDER BORDER BORDER - when there's legislation - your leader say DO NOTHING until I'm back in office. Do you like this stance also?
Jamie, if I had the answers to all the questions which you frequently ask/demand of me, I would be have guest slots on all the cable news shows and be interviewed in major newspapers and magazines.
One of the reasons the border bill failed, I believe, is that the bill was jammed with a greedy variety of goodies, with the border crisis getting lost in the mix. Please remember Biden did not give the border his attention for three plus years, allowing folks like Mayorkas and Harris get away with saying the border was closed, or under control.
I am not, and most likely never will be, a Trump confidant.
You can believe what you want about why the border bill failed. But this doesn't change the fact that it failed because Trump wanted it to fail and his minions in what was once the Republican Party followed his wishes.
And Trump wanted it to fail so that he could make it a campaign issue. Trump thrives on chaos and has no real interests much behind railing against brown people and being in the news everyday.
mtierney said:
What if the border wall had been completed by Biden? It was to be a physical barrier to show that America was a goal to be achieved by law-abiding immigrants. Biden halted the construction within days after the election, out of spite, and the world saw an “open sesame sign” at the border.
Biden’s vanity and his sense of entitlement brought us the current state of affairs. Just imagine, what would be the state of the nation today if the Wall had been completed and was operational over the last few years? We might be asking ourselves “Trump, who?”
Biden instead focused on freeing millions of students of education debts — but, the covid pandemic has changed America’s young people in many ways. Will they repay Biden for his largesse in November? Or will these voters be bitter and disaffected by the higher education and financial industries which entrapped them — and opt out on Election Day?
the border wall is the dumbest idea ever, and it won't work. even this guy admits it
Rentals
Sponsored Business
Promote your business here - Businesses get highlighted throughout the site and you can add a deal.
WOW! Jim and db have it all figured out! Only their POVs, their opinions, their news sources are worth consideration. No need for elections, just select a few like-minded folks to pick someone who agree with them!
“Democracy is a system of government in which state power is vested in the people or the general population of a state. According to the United Nations, democracy "provides an environment that respects human rights and fundamental freedoms, and in which the freely expressed will of people is exercised." Wikipedia
Only liberal progressives would openly support a system of government (or community chatline) which avoids hearing/reading conflicting life experiences, opinions, or beliefs of fellow human beings/neighbors/conservatives. Why do you suppose they feel so threatened?
Why do the polls show so many Americans questioning the direction of the Biden Administration?
I believe it is ignorant — and dangerous —to promote or endorse a closed mind. One-sided conversations usually end up — here for sure — with Boys Club infighting.
I may hold my nose often while I read a variety of newspapers and periodicals, watch CNN, MSNBC, and have been a lifelong PBS supporter and viewer. The recent revelations by a NPR editor of how our tax dollars are being used, makes me queasy, however. Especially so, as April 15 looms!