How many people who think there shouldn’t be a state of Israel has Chuck Todd had on his show? How many Al Qaeda generals has he interviewed about their views on America? How many explicitly violent climate revolutionaries? We might not like what they have to say but we may have to deal with them right?
2 Likes
This probably would happen some, but it’s still far better to dunk on them and get this reaction than to just invite them on and let them spew bullshit unchecked. But it’s possible that not inviting them on is better still. I’m just saying that if they took that approach, I’d be a lot less bothered by it than what they are currently doing.
Putting them on and dunking on them requires a truly exceptional and well prepared questioner. Like I’m sure mayor Pete could do it but basically zero journalists can. The answer is deplatforming. You might say “they’ll just go to Facebook,” and the answer there is to regulate Facebook. Basically make people work as hard as Ron Paul racists worked for the newsletters about inferior minorities or whatever.
The bullshit thrives on resentment/grievance based dopamine hits. That has to go away.
Mehdi Hasan?
1 Like
Dunking on idiots is mildly entertaining but does nothing to educate me, the viewer. That’s time that could have been spent having an expert tell me something interesting about the world.
The dunks, if done well, can absolutely be educational. Maybe not to you, but certainly to a lower info viewer.
I like where your heart is on this, but the devil is in the details. Like, we have to confront the reality that many, many people have been trained to reject consumption of new information using reason and fact/data based analysis. When you say the dunking might be educational to a lower info viewer, the problem is that the lower info viewers that are persuadable with reason basically don’t exist. The current technocratic class (call them liberals, call them Dems, whatever) keeps making the mistake of doing stuff like “dunking” on Republican stupidity thinking it will make a difference, but it doesn’t. People all over the internet have been dunking on dumb Republicans since at least W’s presidency. It is very much navel gazing, this isn’t a reasoned debate between sincere parties and isn’t going to be anytime soon. America is at the same point as early 1930s Germany and trying to show Republicans how smart you are will go about as well as trying to show Nazis the same thing.
2 Likes
So broken it’s unfixable.
I feel like there’s a better way to write this headline so you don’t have to get to the last, orphaned word.
5 Likes
And then there are his stated views on the media. “I just can’t overstate how disgusted I am,” he told the Fox-owned sports media site Outkick in April. “The media is basically Praetorian Guard for the ruling class, the bodyguards for Jeff Bezos. That’s the opposite of what we should have. I really hate them for it, I’ll be honest.”
This is pretty dumb if you read the new article. She has a really poor view of the court and Breyer but is simply pointing out the more he is pushed the more likely he is to resist. If you listen to her podcast she is closer to “5-4” in her view of the court than she is some institutionalist.
Bazelon has also publicly said she was totally wrong about pushing RBG.
CNN just ran a whole segment starting the whitewashing of Ivanka and Jared. Apparently they no longer like the orange idiot. Soon they will have been the moderating force in the Whitehouse. Then one runs as a dem!
So gross.
4 Likes
Hooray! Our long national nightmare of will she or won’t she go to the border is finally over! I don’t think my heart could have taken the suspense for another day.
Thank you so much right-wing media for bringing this all important issue to our attention, and the rest of the MSM for taking the bait hook, line and sinker. Great job to all involved.
https://twitter.com/evelynpix/status/1407529403169509379
“The scene tonight at a raucous Loudoun County school board hearing where many came to voice inchoate rage to a vague concept they don’t understand.”
Fixed the headline.
Without reading the article, I assume that Breyer believes that the Supreme Court should be apolitical and that bowing to pressure to resign would create the appearance that he is influenced by politicians, so he would be inclined to resist to protect the reputation of the institution.
Exactly.