Qasim Rashid, Esq.Tonight Democrats proved that old quip.
If a genie gave Democrats 3 wishes, they'd negotiate it down to 1, and then wish for something they think Republicans will like.
We need a true opposition party now more than ever. Because this aint it.
Bill ZaumenApparently (just saw this as more details are coming out) the deal will reverse the mass firings of government employees , set up a mid-December vote on extending AFA subsidies, and will fund most federal agencies until late January.
FreediverX@bzdev @QasimRashid
Wow, can’t tell if I’m more impressed by your fawning defense of corrupt corporate Democrats or your citation of a <checks notes> Bloomberg article to support your argument.
Correction: Forbes
@freediverx @QasimRashid I hate to introduce a sense of reality, but (a) I merely summarized an article, (b) stating what appears to be the facts is not a "fawning defense" of anything, and (c) the article was in Forbes, not Bloomberg, & was merely the first one I found with any details. Forbes is read by a lot of business types who want accurate information to help them read the tea leaves to see if their portfolios might go up or down, so it is a good news source. Just ignore the editorials.
@bzdev @QasimRashid
Typo on my part but Forbes isn’t any more credible than Bloomberg. They are propaganda rags for capital. Might as well throw in links to the Wall Street Journal or the New York Times (tagline: Defending Nazis since the 1930s’.)
Typo on my part but Forbes isn’t any more credible than Bloomberg. They are propaganda rags for capital. Might as well throw in links to the Wall Street Journal or the New York Times (tagline: Defending Nazis since the 1930s’.)
@freediverx @QasimRashid While neither Forbes, Bloomberg, the NYT, or the WSJ are perfect, their news articles tend to be more accurate than many other outfits as far as reporting the facts go. That doesn't mean you should accept their opinion pieces, which can be highly slanted.
There is a famous case of the NYT getting things really, really wrong in an editorial, finally publishing a retraction decades after the mistake:
https://www.forbes.com/sites/kionasmith/2018/07/19/the-correction-heard-round-the-world-when-the-new-york-times-apologized-to-robert-goddard/
@bzdev @QasimRashid
I’m not saying those publications regularly publish blatantly false information, as one might expect from Fox News ,for example. But they consistently frame stories in ways that favor capital and power, while relying on sources with the same biases.
Note, for example, how the NYT regularly acts as stenographers for Israel, posting corrections days or weeks later when it’s too late to make a difference.
Not to mention their horrible editorials and opinion pieces.
@freediverx @QasimRashid Let's just say that being able to distinguish between opinion and facts just might be a useful skill.
@bzdev @QasimRashid
The NYT features opinion pieces with a very specific conservative bias, and their reporting consistently frames stories with that same bias.
List of The New York Times controversies
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_The_New_York_Times_controversies
Pulitzer Prize Winning Journalist Chris Hedges Exposes How the New York Times Became Israel’s Favorite Mouthpiece
https://www.reddit.com/r/AlJazeera/comments/1llqlek/chris_hedges_exposes_how_the_new_york_times/
Is the New York Times trying to wreck Zohran Mamdani’s mayoral bid?
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2025/jul/07/is-the-new-york-times-trying-to-wreck-zohran-mamdanis-mayoral-bid
@bzdev @QasimRashid
When it comes to journalistic standards, their prime directives appear to be 1) don't fuck with the advertisers, and 2) never risk losing access to those in power.
How ‘access journalism’ is threatening investigative journalism
https://theconversation.com/how-access-journalism-is-threatening-investigative-journalism-108831
@freediverx @QasimRashid Let's see. Some guy quotes an article appearing on The Conversation that appears to be discussing some situation in Australia, and also an article in The Guardian where it seems that a NY Times reporter did a less than stellar job in vetting sources, got some factual statements correct but not providing the whole story, only to have some independent political operative misuse it. Neither has anything to do with how accurate the NY Times is in general.