American Politics

[MarquisdeSade1]

If you're paying them $X and they don't want to kill themselves, its way too much.

If you're paying them X yuan and they jump to their deaths off the roofs regularly you've probably found the sweet spot.

But a small problem.

Small solution= install some nets.

Catch them like fish jumping out of the water.

And throw them right back into the slave factory.

I'm guessing American slaveholders were mostly Libertarians in their economic mindset.

I was reading about Brasil they imported more slaves than anyone, why?

Because they are so close to the west cost of slave land.

They wouldn't take care of them like medical or anything like that.

It was just cheaper to just let them die and buy another one.

Throwaway slaves.

Kinda like trash from CCP land use it once.

You're lucky if you get one solid use out of it.

And throw it away.

Rinse and repeat.

[MarquisdeSade1]

Breitbart's Astonishing Confession.

The editor of the right-wing news site admitted that its coverage of a major political campaign was dishonest, but the news barely made a blip in conservative media outlets.

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics...sumers/549335/

Editor Admits Breitbart Publishes Fake News.

Confession: website tried to destroy credible Roy Moore victim to protect Trump.

https://www.theamericanconservative....s-alex-marlow/

As for Fux News Channel's historic $787 Million (and that was a last minute panic settlement!) admission that their entire organization from top to bottom was about protecting and supporting Trump's anti-America. America-hating lies, does anyone even need to post additional links of substantiation for it?

So Tiny's All Sides links and the Winger Media Outlets themselves established the standards; the more Winger Bias the media outlet, +4 or +5, for example, the greater the liars it is, as in the case with proven and admitted liars Fux News Channel and Breitbart.

On the other hand, it stands to reason the further away the media outlet scores from +4 or +5, apparently -5 or better, the greater the truth-teller and fact-based they are, as is the case with MSNBC.

Which, not coincidentally, does mirror the findings of Politico with regard to the far more truthful MSNBC vs the $787 Million proven liar Fux News Channel as well. ".

I'm sure even saints lie once in awhile.

More of your false equivalencies and whataboutisms.

Theres a massive difference between lying once in awhile.

And lying every single time one opens ones hole.

Like you Dirty Joe Bubba Hussein Obama Maddow et al.

Lying 99.9999999999999999% like you and Dirty Joe or 0. 000000000000000000001% of the time like Breitbart.

[MarquisdeSade1]

"A media outlet that is smack dab in the middle at 0 would likely only rarely tell the truth or accurately report the facts.

Facts have a well-known Liberal Bias.

Lies have a well-known Winger Bias.

If a media outlet does not even bother to report obviously Liberal Bias truth and facts, what the hell is it reporting?

Only the time of day in its Time Zone?

Well, at least it wouldn't be reporting ridiculously silly lies on practically every subject like those Winger Bias media outlets have to be reporting to get a rating of +4 or, holy shit, a +5!

Why so you can re-spew it lololol.

How about looking for the truth instead.

Thats where my bias lies.

What are your grievances with reality?

The truth will set you free my brother!

[MarquisdeSade1]

A media outlet that is smack dab in the middle at 0 would likely only rarely tell the truth or accurately report the facts.

Facts have a well-known Liberal Bias.

Lies have a well-known Winger Bias.

If a media outlet does not even bother to report obviously Liberal Bias truth and facts, what the hell is it reporting?

Only the time of day in its Time Zone?

Well, at least it wouldn't be reporting ridiculously silly lies on practically every subject like those Winger Bias media outlets have to be reporting to get a rating of +4 or, holy shit, a +5!

CSPAN.

[EihTooms]

Or that's what All Sides ratings of media bias would indicate anyway. A media source that is smack dab in the center would get a "0" rating. The farthest left rating is -6 and the farthest right is +6.

MSNBC gets -5. 7. That must be about as biased as you can get. Breitbart gets +5. And Fox gets a fair and balanced 4.

I was kind of surprised with MSNBC this evening. Some guy with a British accent was taking Chris Hays place. He actually spent about 10 minutes truly digging deep into Bob Menendez getting bribed to get Egypt to agree to make his benefactor the sole certifier for meat imports from America. Menendez is a notoriously corrupt Democratic Senator, and he's being prosecuted again.

Of course the other 50 minutes of the show were nonstop anti-Republican propaganda though.

Breitbart's Astonishing Confession.
The editor of the right-wing news site admitted that its coverage of a major political campaign was dishonest, but the news barely made a blip in conservative media outlets.

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics...sumers/549335/

Editor Admits Breitbart Publishes Fake News.
Confession: website tried to destroy credible Roy Moore victim to protect Trump.

https://www.theamericanconservative....s-alex-marlow/

As for Fux News Channel's historic $787 Million (and that was a last minute panic settlement!) admission that their entire organization from top to bottom was about protecting and supporting Trump's anti-America. America-hating lies, does anyone even need to post additional links of substantiation for it?

So Tiny's All Sides links and the Winger Media Outlets themselves established the standards; the more Winger Bias the media outlet, +4 or +5, for example, the greater the liars it is, as in the case with proven and admitted liars Fux News Channel and Breitbart.

On the other hand, it stands to reason the further away the media outlet scores from +4 or +5, apparently -5 or better, the greater the truth-teller and fact-based they are, as is the case with MSNBC.

Which, not coincidentally, does mirror the findings of Politico with regard to the far more truthful MSNBC vs the $787 Million proven liar Fux News Channel as well.

[MarquisdeSade1]

I just scanned the first couple of sentences but yeah, I think I agree with those NYT and Newsmax articles. Nice catch with the $78 hamburger meal and the alcoholism epidemic among NYT journalists too. You're coming around Marquis!

Those articles represent thee raison theêtre or ikigai if you will for the NYT.

Everything else is subterfuge and window dressing for the Macro agenda (see articles attach).

Some libertarians like you (Mitt and Flake) have teamed up with the likes of NYT MSNBC WAPO National Review.

To demonize orange man.

For only one purpose.

Cheap slavery from CCP land.

Nothing else matters.

NYT started ME2 and hung Harvey.

They fueled BLM riots.

They were all about gay marriage and now cutting 5 yr olds dicks off.

Its all a BIG CON.

They are whoors that only care about one thing.

Manipulating the lemmings to support whatever they say in support.

Of the MACRO agenda.

Dirt cheap slavery operations in CCP land.

Well orange man fucked that up for them, so they cheated him out in 2020 and they will surely at least try in 2024.

Next stop is India, very ripe for exploitation.

https://pulitzercenter.org/blog/worlds-toilet-crisis

Watch this shit!

[MarquisdeSade1]

"Krugman has a well known Democratic Party bias. He's not a liberal. Nor are you or the Marquis, despite his belief that he's less conservative than I am. Classical and economic liberals don't believe in heavy government intervention in the economy. Both of you distrust free markets and want to prevent business owners from cutting jobs or filing for bankruptcy. You want to grow the federal government and the Marquis wants to cut off trade with China. While I'm happy you're not at each others throats again, I'm also happy you're not dictators of the United States of America, because your ideas are a recipe for a moribund economy.

And yes, facts do have a liberal (classical, economic, and social liberal) bias."

Free trade and free markets are euphemisms for slavery, plain and simple.

Wall St loves Asia because it has billions of dirt poor slaves.

No pesky costly environmental protections.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...cape-smog.html

No pesky costly labor laws.

https://www.theguardian.com/technolo...device-extract

How bad does it have to be to go to the roof and jump.

https://www.reddit.com/r/pics/commen...the/?rdt=40681

I don't remember reading about slaves in America ever killing themselves or even the slave owners.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Kanye/comme..._was_a_choice/

I'm guessing slaves in CCP land have it much much worse worse than in they did in the American south.

[EihTooms]

Or that's what All Sides ratings of media bias would indicate anyway. A media source that is smack dab in the center would get a "0" rating. The farthest left rating is -6 and the farthest right is +6.

MSNBC gets -5. 7. That must be about as biased as you can get. Breitbart gets +5. And Fox gets a fair and balanced 4.

I was kind of surprised with MSNBC this evening. Some guy with a British accent was taking Chris Hays place. He actually spent about 10 minutes truly digging deep into Bob Menendez getting bribed to get Egypt to agree to make his benefactor the sole certifier for meat imports from America. Menendez is a notoriously corrupt Democratic Senator, and he's being prosecuted again.

Of course the other 50 minutes of the show were nonstop anti-Republican propaganda though.

A media outlet that is smack dab in the middle at 0 would likely only rarely tell the truth or accurately report the facts.

Facts have a well-known Liberal Bias.

Lies have a well-known Winger Bias.

If a media outlet does not even bother to report obviously Liberal Bias truth and facts, what the hell is it reporting?

Only the time of day in its Time Zone?

Well, at least it wouldn't be reporting ridiculously silly lies on practically every subject like those Winger Bias media outlets have to be reporting to get a rating of +4 or, holy shit, a +5!

[EihTooms]

Krugman has a well known Democratic Party bias. He's not a liberal. Nor are you or the Marquis, despite his belief that he's less conservative than I am. Classical and economic liberals don't believe in heavy government intervention in the economy. Both of you distrust free markets and want to prevent employers from cutting jobs or filing for bankruptcy. You want to grow government and the Marquis wants to cut off trade with China. While I'm happy you're not at each others throats again, I'm also happy you're not dictators of the United States of America, because your ideas are a recipe for a moribund economy.

You can't snow me with your revisionist history contradicting the reality of typical Repub Administration Economic Disasters vs typical Dem Administration Far Superior Results.

I was born before Eisenhower's 1st Recession. I was a bit too young to be fully aware of the downturn in his 2nd Recession. But by the time of his 3rd Recession I was far enough into grade school to read, write, understand much of what was being reported on the evening news and was fully aware of how shitty economic conditions were under Ike. Compounded by the shitty economic conditions in our Ruby Red state anyway.

Which was why the adults in my extended family had to get the hell out of that place and hope for much Happier Days post-Ike. I was even aware that the improvement in all of their job opportunities was as much about Ike being replaced by JFK and his decidedly non Repub policies and stewardship as our escape from that Ruby Red state.

Every Repub Admin result vs Dem Admin result since has repeated the same Crap Repub results vs Far Superior Dem results pattern. Only more so.

So MittWitt's Bain Capital somehow created 750,000 low paying jobs at Staples, did it?

MittWitt's endorsement of and vote for Trump's classic Repub economic policies and stewardship wiped out 26 times that many USA jobs just in the month of April 2020! LOL.

He wasn't Senator yet, but I don't recall MittWitt speaking out against so-called president George W. Bush's classic Repub economic policies and stewardship that eventually wiped out 750,000 and more USA jobs in a single month when those classic Repub economic policies and stewardship came to fruition.

Yeah. Big difference between classic numbskull Repub economic policies for an entire nation and what some team of corporate henchmen can do to make CEOs and corporate board members wealthier.

[Tiny 12]

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/09/23/o...ina-trade.html

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/03/11/o...pgtype=Article

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/08/06/o...pgtype=Article

https://www.newsmax.com/newsfront/bi...22/id/1135535/

I just scanned the first couple of sentences but yeah, I think I agree with those NYT and Newsmax articles. Nice catch with the $78 hamburger meal and the alcoholism epidemic among NYT journalists too. You're coming around Marquis!

[Tiny 12]

Oh, if MSNBC have a more Left / Liberal Bias and Fux and Breitbart have a more Right / Conservative Bias, then that only confirms the Politico and other site findings that MSNBC is more truthful and legitimately informative than the other two. Probably WAY more truthful, according to your All Sides links.

Makes sense.

This was back in 2017. My God, imagine how much more extreme it has gotten since then:

Facts Have a Well-Known Liberal Bias

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/08/o...eral-bias.html

By Paul Krugman.

Dec. 8, 2017.

You, Marquis and other NYT subscribers can read the rest in the link.

Krugman has a well known Democratic Party bias. He's not a liberal. Nor are you or the Marquis, despite his belief that he's less conservative than I am. Classical and economic liberals don't believe in heavy government intervention in the economy. Both of you distrust free markets and want to prevent business owners from cutting jobs or filing for bankruptcy. You want to grow the federal government and the Marquis wants to cut off trade with China. While I'm happy you're not at each others throats again, I'm also happy you're not dictators of the United States of America, because your ideas are a recipe for a moribund economy.

And yes, facts do have a liberal (classical, economic, and social liberal) bias.

[MarquisdeSade1]

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/09/23/o...ina-trade.html

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/03/11/o...pgtype=Article

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/08/06/o...pgtype=Article

https://www.newsmax.com/newsfront/bi...22/id/1135535/

[EihTooms]

Or that's what All Sides ratings of media bias would indicate anyway. A media source that is smack dab in the center would get a "0" rating. The farthest left rating is -6 and the farthest right is +6.

MSNBC gets -5.7. That must be about as biased as you can get. Breitbart gets +5. And Fox gets a fair and balanced 4.

I was kind of surprised with MSNBC this evening. Some guy with a British accent was taking Chris Hays place. He actually spent about 10 minutes truly digging deep into Bob Menendez getting bribed to get Egypt to agree to make his benefactor the sole certifier for meat imports from America . Menendez is a notoriously corrupt Democratic Senator, and he's being prosecuted again.

Of course the other 50 minutes of the show were nonstop anti-Republican propaganda though.

https://www.allsides.com/news-source/msnbc
https://www.allsides.com/news-source/breitbart
https://www.allsides.com/news-source/fox-news-editorial-media-bias

Oh, if MSNBC have a more Left / Liberal Bias and Fux and Breitbart have a more Right / Conservative Bias, then that only confirms the Politico and other site findings that MSNBC is more truthful and legitimately informative than the other two. Probably WAY more truthful, according to your All Sides links.

Makes sense.

This was back in 2017. My God, imagine how much more extreme it has gotten since then:

Facts Have a Well-Known Liberal Bias

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/08/o...eral-bias.html

By Paul Krugman.

Dec. 8, 2017.

There are two central facts about 21st-century U.S. politics. First, we suffer from asymmetric polarization: the Republican Party has become an extremist institution with little respect for traditional norms of any kind. Second, mainstream media still the source of most political information for the great majority of Americans havent been able to come to grips with this reality. Even in the age of Trump, they try desperately to be balanced, which in practice means bending over backwards to say undeserved nice things about Republicans and take undeserved swipes at Democrats.

This dynamic played a crucial role in last years election; its one of the reasons major news organizations devoted more time to Hillary Clintons emails than to all policy issues combined. But it has been going on for years. Its the whole story of Paul Ryans career: journalists trying to be centrists desperately wanted to show their neutrality by praising a Serious, Honest, Conservative, and promoted Ryan into that role even though it was obvious from the beginning that he was a con man.

You, Marquis and other NYT subscribers can read the rest in the link.

[EihTooms]

Well goodness, I struck quite the chord. My impression from following the forum is that you two legendary mongers met and bonded. And things subsequently unraveled because of your political differences. And now I'm bringing you back together again! I'm happy for you.

The only way you're going to substantially increase GDP and prosperity in the USA is through increases in productivity. In economic terms, productivity is defined as units of output per hour worked. You don't increase productivity the Biden Way, which is also called the French Way, by keeping people in jobs that have become redundant. Or the Trump Way, also called the Biden Way since Biden carried on with his policies, by imposing massive tariffs on toys and textiles and the like in a futile attempt to bring low end manufacturing jobs back to America. You do it the Romney Way, also called the American Way and the Singapore Way, by improving the efficiency and competitiveness of businesses. Yes, this will result overall in people moving from jobs that add less value to jobs that add more value. Fewer people will be employed in low skilled occupations.

An example from years past, it used to take many farmers to supply our country with food. Now far fewer farmers using machinery and technology till much longer plots of land and supply the world with food. And many of the displaced farm workers found better jobs, to replace what they had before. That's the Romney Way!!!

And you're dead wrong about the net jobs. Without Romney, Staples, which employs 75,000 people, probably wouldn't exist. Yes, Bain took over other companies that went bankrupt and companies where it cut jobs. It also took over companies where it added jobs. But they cancel out. Staples added lots more jobs than the puny cuts outlined in your links.

Marquis, I've run out of free National Review articles, so if I don't pick up on something that's why.

If any Repub or Coven of Repubs could ever have produced something remotely positive like that in the USA economy instead of every Great Depression / Great Recession and Massive Jobs Destruction in the Millions and none of the historic Recoveries, Expansions, Massive Job Gains and Deficit Reduction in the past 100 years, they should have done it.

But they didn't.

The Dems did though. Many times over. Especially Biden.

[MarquisdeSade1]

Or that's what All Sides ratings of media bias would indicate anyway. A media source that is smack dab in the center would get a "0" rating. The farthest left rating is -6 and the farthest right is +6.

MSNBC gets -5. 7. That must be about as biased as you can get. Breitbart gets +5. And Fox gets a fair and balanced 4.

I was kind of surprised with MSNBC this evening. Some guy with a British accent was taking Chris Hays place. He actually spent about 10 minutes truly digging deep into Bob Menendez getting bribed to get Egypt to agree to make his benefactor the sole certifier for meat imports from America. Menendez is a notoriously corrupt Democratic Senator, and he's being prosecuted again.

Of course the other 50 minutes of the show were nonstop anti-Republican propaganda though.

https://www.allsides.com/news-source/msnbc

https://www.allsides.com/news-source/breitbart

https://www.allsides.com/news-source...ial-media-bias

But not my beloved Breitbart.

Case in point.

https://www.breitbart.com/the-media/...liating-truth/