Tuesday, January 21, 2020

Former Kansas City News Dude Blogs High Praise For Long Shot NYT Lady Prez Candidate Endorsement Double Down

We have our disagreements with Jimmy C over his continued mix of editorial bloggy flexing disguised as "journalism" and reporting HOWEVER we don't doubt his expertise in explaining the liberal politics of print media newsrooms that dominated back when he was working and, clearly, seem to remain intact. Here's one example out of many:

The New York Times doubles down on gender; endorses Warren and Klobuchar as "The Democrats best choices for president"

The New York Times significantly ratcheted up the prospects of a woman being elected president this year when it endorsed on Sunday U.S. senators Elizabeth Warren and Amy Klobuchar for the Democratic nomination. Even though the two women's politics are at odds -- with Warren being on the progressive end and Klobuchar being in the...

17 comments:

Anonymous said...

It's way too early to call anyone a long shot. If you remember in 2008 we elected a black guy whose middle name is Hussein and in 2016 we went for... the Donald.

Anonymous said...

Jimmy C exemplifies everything that was and is wrong with newsrooms (which, thankfully, are disappearing at a frenetic pace). Zero objectivity and unabashed liberal bias.

He would love to be working now, since papers don't even try and conceal their prejudice. In his day, they simply lied about it.

Newspapers don't report news; they promote an agenda and peddle propaganda. They don't write for readers; they write for the approval of other journalists (in fact, they view readers as utter morons).

You will rarely come across a more brain-dead environment than a newsroom.

Anonymous said...

Professor wackadoodle and ms. milquetoast. Exciting endorsements!!!

Anonymous said...

^^^And yet The NYT knows who they are and you not so much. Weird.

Anonymous said...

Either one for VP - Biden for President, Trump for Inmate 407325!

chuck said...

6:53

Dead on the money.

From the NYT -
“There are legitimate questions about whether our democratic system is fundamentally broken. Our elections are getting less free and fair, Congress and the courts are increasingly partisan, foreign nations are flooding society with misinformation, a deluge of money flows through our politics. And the economic mobility that made the American dream possible is vanishing."

This is exactly why Trump was elected. The only caveat is that indeed, things are more partisan now. Prior to Trump's ascendance, there was very little push back to the Republican-Democrat-Uni-Party that ruled over us now. THAT is the real reason for the Ruling Class from both parties to engage in the assassination of any and everything that has to do with Trump.

Assassination is NOT too strong a word. The trillions and trillions of dollars that used to funnel through the Clintons, the Bidens, the Pelosis and the legion of connected, "special" Kleptocrats by way of "Foundations" foreign aide kickbacks (Jesus, the Bidens are a perfect example, but so are the McCains and Lindsey Graham and many others.)

The idea that the New York Times, the Washington Post and the Wall Street Journal are now more powerful than before the advent of the Interweb is ridiculous.

The Interweb has not made us any uglier as a nation than we already were. It does shine a light on the heretofore unknown opinions of the proles who formerly had no voice. The disaffected, beta male, fashionably distaff, preoccupied former scribes who seek acceptance from there contemporaries are certain that the world they helped create (See the above quote from the NYT) was much better, because in that world, they wielded power, made bank and were far more secure in sinecure than they are now.

Trump 2020

Anonymous said...

Identity politics at its best.
The two of them are as far apart on philosophy and policies as they can possible be.
So what do they have in common?
It's too bad one of the candidates isn't a bi-racial black transgender woman whose priority issue is climate change.
Then they could put Xs in all the identity boxes simultaneously.
If either of these two end up being the Democratic candidate, they will lose.
Proving once again, that condescending folks like the NYT editorial board think that everything and everyone west of the Hudson River are uneducated losing deplorables.
Echo chamber on steroids.

Lorem Ipsum said...

Chuck, rather than ranting, please explain exactly what your think Trump can possibly accomplish if he is reelected. Please!

He has accomplished absolutely nothing during his first four years, with the exception of the now traditional Republican Tax Cut for the wealthy, (and its inevitably massive increase in the Deficit and devaluation of the Dollar). And this was the only thing he managed to accomplish, in spite of having GOP Hegemony for half of his term in Office. What then, do you think he could possibly get done in another four years?

Or do you contend that his failure is to be blamed on the "Deep State", which is most probably, in the end' just another euphemism for this chaotic, unwieldy kludge we call America, and if so, what hope for change do we have?

Remember that Cassandra's curse was not really that no one would listen to her, it was that all she could do was "view with alarm", and that she had nothing to offer but "warnings".

Don't just try to frighten us, Chuck, enlighten us!

Anonymous said...

^^^^^If you don't count the economy, employment, border security, prison reform, deregulation - pretty much everything else he promised to accomplish, then ...I guess you are right.

Anonymous said...

NYT seems to be of the position that a woman would be best to lead the country, regardless of their policy positions. Why not just endorse "any woman".

Lorem Ipsum said...

@8:17
Economy - GDP under 2% vs. promised 5-7% growth.

Employment - recalculated under the methods and rules in effect when Trump took office = 10+% unemployment, slightly ore that in 2016.

Border Security - what change in Border Security?, Same number of illegals, in fact some of the same illegals crossing.

Prison Reform - ? What change?

Deregulation - Some, I guess, Banks are now allowed to take more risks and their Capital Requirements are less. Oh, and more Coal is being burned, less Solar is being installed. Is that what you mean?

chuck said...

First of all, having Paul Ryan sabotage everything you attempt in the first 2 years (Along with dozens of other "Never Trumpers") is NOT "GOP Hegemony.)

The left is now so entrenched in their hatred of Trump, that He gets literally NO CREDIT for anything from the MSM (Don't make me post the URLs). 96% of his coverage is negative.

It's sick.

Look, I think Obama had guts to make the call on Osama.

I think Clinton (With the notable exception of selling us out to the Chinese.) as a pretty good president. I think Bush-Cheney were idiots.

There is no diversity of opinion on Trump's accomplishments, of which there are actually many on the left. It's a liberal monolith of opinion with the MSM monkeys in Kubrick's Space Odyssey beating their chests and screaming at the sky.

I am not going to argue with you about what he has done, it's fact.

Here is what he will do in his second term.

He (Eagerly) will wait for China to break the trade agreement in the first year and with the risk of recession, go all ahead flank with complete disengagement with China. They are an (A word you guys love-) existential threat to our future. Liars, untrustworthy, "Art Of War", Machiavellian enemies of freedom, liberty and all things Occidental.

Russian should be an ally. We have a great deal in common with them, they have Nukes and it is logical. The Dems wrecked any possible alignment with them in pursuit of the disgraceful, contemptible, ill advised "Russian Collusion" hoax.

Russia's economy is the size of Spain's.

They are not invading fuckin Poland, it is full of Polacks and this ain't 1979.

Speaking of 1979, we should have sent surface to air missiles to Russia, NOT the Mujahideen. Our foreign policy since Vietnam has been a disaster.

Trump will continue to try and decentralize power away for unelected bureaucrats in D.C. who actually, to the detriment of this country, have been making decisions that have killed us, literally and figuratively over the last 50 years. Elections should count and highly stationed employees of the Fed should NOT be the final word on policy.

He will, I believe make some very unpopular decisions with respect to entitlements including SS that need to be made.

Primarily he will continue to concentrate on the economy and putting native born Americans first in his quest to make America great again, as he has done in his first term.

The Democrats who are on the ticket, support free health care for the fuckin world, the New Green Deal and a litany of literally insane ideas that are tethered to the actual subterfuge which permeates the left, acquisition of complete power.

It's antithetical to - at least, what we used to be.

I hope, for the good of this once great nation, you fail.

Anonymous said...

I'm shocked and stunned and triggered that the NYT didn't endorse Joy Behar and Bruce Jenner.

They're really leaning to the right these days.

Anonymous said...

The funniest bit of the endorsement was this: "Senator Warren is a gifted storyteller." Such crafty wordsmiths. But it would be difficult, even for the N.Y. Times, to endorse a flagrant liar. Warren's lies are legion, from her Indian heritage to losing her teaching job due to being pregnant to her parents' elopement and her children's private schooling.

Anonymous said...

“Elizabeth Warren is a congenital storyteller.”

There, it makes sense now. I am surprised she hasn't tried to introduce Morgan Fairchild as her spouse.

Anonymous said...

She just wanted to buy tax free cigarettes from the Indian casinos.

Anonymous said...

If chuck is right and trump is really going to go after social security my grandparents need to get active. Along with all their friends. Against trump.