That picture right there is all they need to stop reproduction.
Media Corruption
- Thread starter GURPS
- Start date
That picture right there is all they need to stop reproduction.
This Axios Article Hilariously Showed What Happens When the Democrat Media Complex Crashes Into a Wall
Like most left-leaning outlets, Axios has its good days and bad. They were excellent reporting on the turmoil and chaos that engulfed the Biden White House after the June 27 debate, which killed the president’s re-election effort. The White House staff’s irreparable deflation, Democratic congressional aides panicking, and the slew of calls with party leaders made disastrous headlines for the president. With Biden gone, Kamala Harris has taken the reins, and her first public policy proposal is to enact price fixes to curb the rising process from the Biden-Harris inflationary agenda. Axios tried to spin this and got slapped with a brutal fact check on Twitter (via Daily Wire):
Media Have Become ‘Government Mouthpieces, Stenographers for Organs of Power’
“How did the Democratic Party choose a candidate that has never done an interview or debate during the entire election cycle?” he said, referring to Vice President Kamala Harris’s ongoing practice of hiding from the media.
“We know the answers. They did it by weaponizing the government agencies. They did it by abandoning democracy. They did it by suing the opposition and by disenfranchising American voters,” Kennedy continued. “What most alarms me is not how the Democratic Party conducts its internal affairs or runs its candidates. What alarms me is the resort to censorship and media control and a weaponization of the federal agencies.”
Kennedy added, “When a U.S. president colludes with or outright coerces media companies to censor political speech, it is an attack on our most sacred right of free expression, and that’s the very right upon which all of our other constitutional rights rest.”
He noted:
Kennedy pointed out that he has only been asked to sit for a few interviews with corporate media — all while the left-leaning press ran hit pieces on him and while those same networks worked with the DNC to keep him from joining the debate stage.
Left-Wing Salon Attacks MAGA Over Refusal to Admit Ella Emhoff Is ‘Cute’ — ‘Unapologetic Misogyny’
The Tuesday essay, titled “MAGA attacks on Kamala Harris’ stepdaughter threaten to backfire on Donald Trump,” was penned by Salon senior politics writer Amanda Marcotte, who accused leading voices within the MAGA movement of “proving that they are weird” for their ongoing obsession with Kamala Harris’s stepdaughter.
The author describes Ella Emhoff as “a fashion icon” whose “creativity, beauty, and easygoing love for her family has sent many on the right into paroxysms of rage.”
Insisting that the Trump campaign strategy appeals to “ugly, bitter people with a message of resentment” as well as “bitter men who would rather gripe about ‘wokeness’ than take responsibility for their personal failings,” the piece claims that Emhoff “triggers the incel-minded online right by being a Brooklyn hipster who rejects the tiresome conservative rules for how women are allowed to dress or behave.”
“In response, Donald Trump’s fanboys are in a total meltdown, unable to accept the existence of a woman who doesn’t care what they think of her,” Marcotte writes. “And they can’t hide that they’re furious that she looks great doing so.”
LightRoasted
If I may ...
For your consideration ...
Absolutely. Haven't ya heard, an Army marches on its stomach. At least the men won't go hungry.
Absolutely. Haven't ya heard, an Army marches on its stomach. At least the men won't go hungry.
This Is The ‘See No Candidate, Hear No Candidate’ Campaign The Media Are Forcing On Voters
This is a first-of-its-kind presidential campaign where you’re not supposed to see either candidate, aside from the occasional still photo and edited video, accompanied by stories relayed by the media — the vast majority of which will be deceptive, if not outright and blatantly false.
To the extent that it’s in their control — and they do still have a lot of control — the media don’t want voters directly exposed to Trump or Kamala. Trump, because the more voters see him, the more they like him. Kamala, for the exact opposite reason.
Recall the 2016 election roughly 300 years ago. Trump won, and after it was over, the media spent all of 24 hours admitting they had become too insular and were too far removed from the concerns and motivations of Americans who don’t live in Los Angeles, Washington, D.C., and New York. Then they immediately changed course and got to the far easier and more preferable work of sabotaging Trump’s presidency and ensuring they never again made the mistake of treating him like a legitimate elected figure chosen by voters to lead the nation.
That meant dismissing every reason voters had picked a game show host over a former senator and secretary of state to be president and increasingly denying him live TV coverage, which they excused by saying, “Well, all he does is lie, so we’re not gonna show that.”
Suppression of Trump’s speech and image became the norm. By the end of his presidency, he was kicked off Facebook, Instagram, and Twitter. Remember when CNN last year hosted Trump (a former president who was running for president again) in a live televised town hall setting? When it proved beneficial for the candidate, the rest of the media lamented the event’s host as “set up to fail.” Then CNN’s parent company fired the channel’s top executive.
After the town hall event, Trump essentially disappeared from live TV (outside of Fox News appearances). That is, until the debate in June, ironically, also hosted by CNN. That one ended up benefiting Trump too. So much so that Democrats were willing to risk the power of incumbency by pulling the plug on Joe Biden’s campaign and hurling Kamala to the top of the party as the new nominee.
We’re not seeing much of her on TV either. But while Trump wants to be on TV and is denied access, Kamala is intentionally avoiding it and the media are helping.
CBS News Tries to Shame NRSC for Advertising on Hate Site X
It was back in November when Elon Musk filed a lawsuit against Media Matters for America. Musk had said that he was going to file a "thermonuclear lawsuit" against Media Matters for trying to scare away X advertisers like Apple and IBM by showing their ads next to pro-Nazi posts. Michael Shellenberger of The Twitter Files fame said he tried to replicate Media Matters' experience but couldn't. Musk called Media Matters "pure evil."
Mike Berg, chairman of the National Republican Senatorial Committee, shared on Thursday an email he received from a reporter a CBS News who informed him that the previous week, CBS News had "reported on the fact that promoted advertisements are showing up under racist and pro-Nazi posts on X and how those accounts may be financially benefitting from advertising revenue. CBS News had found that the World Bank had pulled its advertising after "a CBS News investigation found promoted advertisements from the organization showing up under a racist post from an account that prolifically posts pro-Nazi and white nationalist content." Which account, they won't glorify by identifying.
"Is the NRSC aware of the content of the accounts under which its ads appear?" "How much has the NRSC spent on X ads since October 2022?"
Kamala Harris and her campaign post on X every day. Is Harris aware she's using a platform riddled with hate speech? Will she pull her X account?
In another media slip-up, NYT opinion editor Michelle Cottle wrote an overly-optimistic piece about Kamala’s very first (softball) interview on CNN last night, with a headline that is a lesson in being damned by faint praise: “Kamala Harris’s TV Interview Was a Solid First Effort.
A first effort? A first effort at what? Kamala has been taking up space in the White House as the Nation’s second-highest official for almost four years now, and before that, she spent five years in the Senate. Before that, she served as California’s state Attorney General. If you’re praising someone with Kamala Devi Harris’s resume as delivering a “solid first effort” at handling a short, softball interview with Dana Bash, well, you’re really saying something else.
Calling it “solid” implies there’s significant room for improvement, which is not exactly a quality you want in a President. Framing her interview as a “first effort” erased Kamala’s professional achievements and expertise, and would be unthinkably disrespectful if applied to a man.
We should also note Kamala’s insistence on having Tim Walz attend the 18-minute interview. She needed a man? (I assume that’s how Tim identifies, but you never know these days.)
This dumbing-down is so like Democrats. The op-ed’s condescending tone and infantilizing low expectations are what Democrats always wheel out for women and black people. They can’t help themselves. It’s not just me saying that. It’s science. From the Washington Post, 2018:
During the interview, Kamala gamely defended her flip-flopping, insisting that, even if her policy positions have reversed, her underlying values have not changed, which is also exactly what billionaire Mark Cuban said, so it’s just a nonsense line they fed her with a silver spoon. What does that even mean?
Not to strain the point, but what's the big dichotomy supposed to be? Something between Kamala’s ‘underlying values’ and what? Her gut versus her intellectual mind? I don't get it. She didn’t say her position changed through learning any new facts.
Of course, everybody knows Kamala’s “values” blather wasn’t meant to be meaningful, it was just more politically expedient babble. So today I’m officially suggesting another possible nickname for President Trump to consider: Kamala Chameleon.
It might not have been such a good idea to bring Walz. The Times’ token ‘conservative’ commenter Bret Stephens found Walz’s part of the interview to be even worse than Kamala’s, since the vice-presidential candidate “was transparently evasive in answering Dana Bash’s questions about his misstatement about his military service, false claims about a D.U.I. arrest and misleading statements about his family’s fertility treatments.”
Can a horrible candidate selected at the last minute be successfully ‘re-introduced to the American people’ through heavy propaganda and media lifting? We shall see.
☕️ KAMALA CHAMELEON ☙ Friday, August 30, 2024 ☙ C&C NEWS 🦠
Dem donors push back on tax plan; first VP interview falls hilariously flat; mile-high Colorado suburb finds new neighbors difficult; Time flip-flop on junk food; 2nd Circuit boosts Sarah Palin; more.
www.coffeeandcovid.com
You really don’t hate the corporate media enough. Yesterday, Evie Magazine ran a story headlined, “Time Magazine Suggests Ultra-Processed Foods Really Aren't That Bad, And The Comments Are Hilarious.”
Last year, Time Magazine ran a common-sense story headlined, “Why Ultra-Processed Foods Are So Bad For You.” Then on Wednesday —one day after RFK’s campaign officially announced its ‘American health’ theme— Time ran the exact opposite story headlined, “What if Ultra-Processed Foods Aren’t as Bad as You Think?”
Even more hilarious, yesterday following a tsunami of social media backlash, Time backpedaled, stealth-editing its terrific 2024 headline to now read: “Why One Dietician is Speaking Up for ‘Ultra-Processed’ Foods.”
Haha, so now it’s just ‘one dietician.’ Not Time.
Time’s 2024 article gamely tried to defend ultra-processed foods (UDFs) by invoking the dark specter of, wait for it, systemic racism. It mostly cited a single expert, a ‘dietician,’ who argued that since UDFs are cheaper, they are good for low-income black people who can’t afford healthier foods. I did not make that up.
The so-called ‘dietician,’ Jessica Wilson, who “specializes in working with clients from marginalized groups,” ahem, claimed that for a month she ate a diet consisting of 80% UDFs. Get this, Jessica’s anecdotal, non-scientific, junk-food diet report: “she had more energy and less anxiety. She didn’t need as much coffee to get through the day and felt more motivated. She felt better eating an ultra-processed diet than she had before.”
To be fair, the article did mention several solid studies showing serious health problems connected to the consumption of UDFs. But the article ended as it started, quoting dietician Jessica, who waved away all the negative research and said it was better not to be hungry than to be completely healthy. “For some people, ultra-processed foods may be the difference between going to bed hungry or full, and Wilson would pick full every time.”
Ms. Wilson is certainly full of something.
Time Magazine had it right back in 2023, before Robert Kennedy joined up with President Trump. Here are a few headlines to give you the idea:
UK Guardian, June 2024:
CNN, February 2024:
The Harvard Gazette, December 2023:
PBS, November 2023:
And perhaps most informative, the UK Guardian, September 2023:
Sometimes one feels a wave of tremendous sympathy for Democrats. What must it be like to have your core beliefs shaped by the whimsical and chimeric corporate media, turning on a dime from day to day, never settled, just based on whatever is momentarily politically expedient? It’s Kamala Chameleonism.
So. Here’s the clip from RFK’s endorsement speech that probably triggered this new corporate media narrative reversal:
CLIP: Robert Kennedy on what’s happening to our children thanks to UDFs (2:53).
Healthy food is now like ivermectin. Come on, y’all, you’re not horses.
☕️ KAMALA CHAMELEON ☙ Friday, August 30, 2024 ☙ C&C NEWS 🦠
Dem donors push back on tax plan; first VP interview falls hilariously flat; mile-high Colorado suburb finds new neighbors difficult; Time flip-flop on junk food; 2nd Circuit boosts Sarah Palin; more.
www.coffeeandcovid.com