RupertKBD Posted March 9 Share Posted March 9 2 hours ago, Sabrefan1 said: It's the NY Post. They're pretty right leaning these days. The left leaning media refused to report on it. So my choice was either Fox News, independent news sites that lean right, or the NY Post. I went with the Post since it was a NY story. Yeah.....these days... .....since 1976, when Rupert Murdoch bought it...... 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PistolPete13 Posted March 9 Share Posted March 9 On 3/7/2024 at 10:50 AM, Joshrips said: There are no Biden economic positives. Runaway inflation undoes any cosmetic debt-driven stock market gains. The only thing that staved off complete disaster was draining the SPR and the demand sugar from the invasion of illegals. Pity the bagholders with mortgages coming due. Are you saying that the illegals have a sweet tooth? The demand sugar is at its worst at Halloween at my house. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PistolPete13 Posted March 9 Share Posted March 9 On 3/7/2024 at 11:09 AM, Joshrips said: Oh ok , you are wealthy. These concerns of people trying to scratch out a living are of no concern then, Biden is your man. TFG doesn’t actually give a shit about the young, the middle and lower classes, and woman and LBTHQ and minorities. I’m not really sure what the attraction is. Is it the neat red ball caps, or the short catchy phrases that any goober can understand. Maybe it’s the TV show that he used to star in. What’s it called, you’re fired? Oh wait The Apprentice. Ooh so cool. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PistolPete13 Posted March 9 Share Posted March 9 On 3/7/2024 at 11:57 AM, Joshrips said: He gave tax breaks to everyone. Yes, I'm fine with that. That's the way it should be. Wrong. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sabrefan1 Posted March 9 Share Posted March 9 5 hours ago, King Heffy said: Thanks, Reagan. Took me a second to figure out what you were saying. It wasn't predominantly him. He was hyper focused on the USSR. It was his pro-corporate party that got that ball rolling. I've said it before, Reagan was a very good foreign policy president, but he was an awful domestic policy leader. I use the term "leader" loosely. He more or less gave his administration free reign in running domestic matters. Although the Democrats of the 80's didn't exactly put up much of a fight. 80's Democrats would be somewhere between moderate and conservative Republicans today. That includes a certain once very wordy senator from Delaware. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sabrefan1 Posted March 9 Share Posted March 9 4 hours ago, Boudrias said: The business plan for good journalism is broke. They cannot generate enough revenue as advertisers drift to online. Every quack has an angle to generate clicks. Half the kids have being an ‘influencer’ as their career goal. Create a following and add revenue will stream to your bank. Truth is secondary. Politicians love it as accountability disappears. Serious issues are never discussed. Canada is a classic example. Before corporations started buying networks and newsrooms it was expected by the networks that they would lose money. They accepted that reality because it was in the best interests of the nation. Corporations don't give a rat's behind about the nation other than whatever profit they can extract from it. The internet was the beginning of the downfall of print journalism. They tried to fight against it and by the time they embraced it, there was too much online competition that was light-years ahead of them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sabrefan1 Posted March 9 Share Posted March 9 2 hours ago, RupertKBD said: Yeah.....these days... .....since 1976, when Rupert Murdoch bought it...... They held out for some time, but after the Fox News model became successful, they weren't given a choice. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boudrias Posted March 9 Share Posted March 9 6 hours ago, Sabrefan1 said: Before corporations started buying networks and newsrooms it was expected by the networks that they would lose money. They accepted that reality because it was in the best interests of the nation. Corporations don't give a rat's behind about the nation other than whatever profit they can extract from it. The internet was the beginning of the downfall of print journalism. They tried to fight against it and by the time they embraced it, there was too much online competition that was light-years ahead of them. How can a business ‘expect’ to lose money unless those losses are being covered by some other source of income. Sorry but businesses have to earn a profit. One can argue whether to much or not. I see public companies as an amalgamation of investors who risk their capital for a return. It has, as a rule, benefited the USA over many years. For example American incomes are 1/3 hirer than Canadian. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sabrefan1 Posted March 9 Share Posted March 9 (edited) 1 hour ago, Boudrias said: How can a business ‘expect’ to lose money unless those losses are being covered by some other source of income. Sorry but businesses have to earn a profit. One can argue whether to much or not. I see public companies as an amalgamation of investors who risk their capital for a return. It has, as a rule, benefited the USA over many years. For example American incomes are 1/3 hirer than Canadian. The networks used to get 10's of millions of viewers to their primetime shows nightly and they charged advertisers accordingly. Their newsrooms were considered a "prestige" expense. After the viewership started to drop and the networks were incurring losses overall, and not just their newsrooms, they became ripe for the pickings by the corporations that eventually bought them. After buying the networks, the newsrooms were remade into what we see now. Profit driven corporate propaganda machines. Cheaper entertainment also became the norm. That's why for the longest time all we saw on television were cheap to produce reality TV shows. That's the only reason why I know a chef named Gordon Ramsay exists and there are big rumped women named Kardashian that are dating and marrying their way through the NBA after running through the world of rappers. The prestige expense model is doomed to failure in corporations where there is no prestige in something non-profitable. It's why I laughed when these streaming/cable networks like Netflix and HBO were spinning the lie to actors that they were offering prestige roles where they could show their talents off. That lasted until the actors finally realized that they were being duped into taking only slightly more upfront money but a lot less long term money for shows that were lucky if the in house algorithms let them last more than a couple of seasons. Edited March 9 by Sabrefan1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post NewbieCanuckFan Posted March 9 Popular Post Share Posted March 9 (edited) Who would've thought so called "good christians" told such whoppers. Person was a victim of sex trafficking in Mexico. During the Bush administration. Not near the border. Another George Santos politician. Edited March 10 by NewbieCanuckFan 3 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewbieCanuckFan Posted March 9 Share Posted March 9 9 hours ago, Sabrefan1 said: Took me a second to figure out what you were saying. It wasn't predominantly him. He was hyper focused on the USSR. It was his pro-corporate party that got that ball rolling. I've said it before, Reagan was a very good foreign policy president, but he was an awful domestic policy leader. I use the term "leader" loosely. He more or less gave his administration free reign in running domestic matters. Although the Democrats of the 80's didn't exactly put up much of a fight. 80's Democrats would be somewhere between moderate and conservative Republicans today. That includes a certain once very wordy senator from Delaware. That was when there was a good number of "Blue Dog Democrats" I believe 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Arrogant Worms Posted March 9 Share Posted March 9 ‘Put it between your knees’: Republican says aspirin is all the contraception women need https://www.rawstory.com/put-it-between-your-knees-republican-says-aspirin-is-all-the-contraception-women-need/ 1 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Arrogant Worms Posted March 9 Share Posted March 9 'Matter of national security': Entity behind Trump’s $91M bond guarantee draws scrutiny https://www.rawstory.com/trump-e-jean-carroll-bond/ 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boudrias Posted March 9 Share Posted March 9 1 hour ago, Sabrefan1 said: The networks used to get 10's of millions of viewers to their primetime shows nightly and they charged advertisers accordingly. Their newsrooms were considered a "prestige" expense. After the viewership started to drop and the networks were incurring losses overall, and not just their newsrooms, they became ripe for the pickings by the corporations that eventually bought them. After buying the networks, the newsrooms were remade into what we see now. Profit driven corporate propaganda machines. Cheaper entertainment also became the norm. That's why for the longest time all we saw on television were cheap to produce reality TV shows. That's the only reason why I know a chef named Gordon Ramsay exists and there are big rumped women named Kardashian that are dating and marrying their way through the NBA after running through the world of rappers. The prestige expense model is doomed to failure in corporations where there is no prestige in something non-profitable. It's why I laughed when these streaming/cable networks like Netflix and HBO were spinning the lie to actors that they were offering prestige roles where they could show their talents off. That lasted until the actors finally realized that they were being duped into taking only slightly more upfront money but a lot less long term money for shows that were lucky if the in house algorithms let them last more than a couple of seasons. Of course much of what you say is true. But how do you fund the news we used to know? I would also throw out the idea that much of the M&A we saw in the industry was an attempt to cut costs by getting bigger. Didn’t work. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RupertKBD Posted March 9 Share Posted March 9 11 hours ago, Sabrefan1 said: They held out for some time, but after the Fox News model became successful, they weren't given a choice. Yeah, the comment just made me chuckle, so I couldn't resist. FWIW, I found similar stories on other outlets, although most were right wing like the NYPost. The one that clinched it for me was The Hill, which is pretty much as middle of the road as you can find these days.... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RupertKBD Posted March 9 Share Posted March 9 (edited) 2 hours ago, The Arrogant Worms said: 'Matter of national security': Entity behind Trump’s $91M bond guarantee draws scrutiny https://www.rawstory.com/trump-e-jean-carroll-bond/ You have to wonder what Greenberg is getting out of this..... To be clear he's committed to covering the amount of close to $100 million dollars, if Trump doesn't pay up himself....Trump. A guy famous for not paying what he owes.... So it begs the question: What could Trump have possibly promised him, that he's willing to make a $100 million dollar bet on it? I guess the other question is whether Greenberg can and will, bail out Bone Spurs on his NY judgement. $100 mil is one thing, but does this guy have the cash (and the lack of brains) to front Bone Spurs a half a billion? Edited March 9 by RupertKBD 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RupertKBD Posted March 9 Share Posted March 9 3 hours ago, Sabrefan1 said: After the viewership started to drop and the networks were incurring losses overall, and not just their newsrooms, they became ripe for the pickings by the corporations that eventually bought them. After buying the networks, the newsrooms were remade into what we see now. Profit driven corporate propaganda machines. Cheaper entertainment also became the norm. That's why for the longest time all we saw on television were cheap to produce reality TV shows. That's the only reason why I know a chef named Gordon Ramsay exists and there are big rumped women named Kardashian that are dating and marrying their way through the NBA after running through the world of rappers. Apropos of nothing, but my all time favorite line from those Jeff Ross celebrity roasts was Blake Griffin talking about Caitlin Jenner: "Caitlin is living proof that no-one in that family wants a white dick".... 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Arrogant Worms Posted March 9 Share Posted March 9 The grift is real... New Co-Chair Lara Trump Tells RNC ‘We Have To Raise A Lot of Money!’ After Pledging ‘Every Single Penny’ To Re-elect Her Father-in-Law https://www.mediaite.com/election-2024/new-co-chair-lara-trump-tells-rnc-we-have-to-raise-a-lot-of-money-after-pledging-every-single-penny-to-re-elect-her-father-in-law/ 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RupertKBD Posted March 9 Share Posted March 9 6 minutes ago, The Arrogant Worms said: The grift is real... New Co-Chair Lara Trump Tells RNC ‘We Have To Raise A Lot of Money!’ After Pledging ‘Every Single Penny’ To Re-elect Her Father-in-Law https://www.mediaite.com/election-2024/new-co-chair-lara-trump-tells-rnc-we-have-to-raise-a-lot-of-money-after-pledging-every-single-penny-to-re-elect-her-father-in-law/ I guess the good news here is that anyone considering a donation to the RNC will now know that their money will be used to pay Trump's legal expenses, rather than helping Republican candidates get elected... They can decide the size of their donation (or whether they donate anything at all) based on that knowledge.... 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Arrogant Worms Posted March 10 Share Posted March 10 Trump Fawns Over ‘Great Leader’ Viktor Orbán on Social Media After Feting Hungarian Autocrat at Mar-a-Lago https://www.mediaite.com/trump/trump-fawns-over-great-leader-viktor-orban-on-social-media-after-feting-hungarian-autocrat-at-mar-a-lago/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Arrogant Worms Posted March 10 Share Posted March 10 (edited) ‘What The F?’ Megyn Kelly Goes To Town On ‘Disgraceful Totally Cringe’ Katie Britt SOTU Response https://www.mediaite.com/news/what-the-f-megyn-kelly-goes-to-town-on-disgraceful-totally-cringe-katie-britt-sotu-response/ The Republicans had an opportunity here to put their best foot forward and just sound normal. That’s it. Don’t shout. Say normal things and speak to regular Americans about what’s real. And they blew it, as they do almost all the time in these state of the Union responses. They put up a rising star in the Republican Party. Katie Britt, who is a senator from the state of Alabama and a Republican, as I said, and I don’t know what the F I saw! I agree with the people saying she looked like she was auditioning for a show on Lifetime! The drama, the fake affectation, the over-the-top portrayal of emotions I did not believe she was feeling at all, her inauthenticity. It was totally cringe, as the kids would say, sorry, this is how I saw it. Edited March 10 by The Arrogant Worms 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Cerridwen Posted March 10 Popular Post Share Posted March 10 9 minutes ago, The Arrogant Worms said: Trump Fawns Over ‘Great Leader’ Viktor Orbán on Social Media After Feting Hungarian Autocrat at Mar-a-Lago https://www.mediaite.com/trump/trump-fawns-over-great-leader-viktor-orban-on-social-media-after-feting-hungarian-autocrat-at-mar-a-lago/ The writing is on the wall and MAGA Republicans are seeing it in an entirely different language than it is written in. What's left in trying to awaken MAGAts to the actual real truth? We've all tried explaining using facts and science but nope. We've tried bludgeoning them with appealing to baser instincts by calling them out to piss them off. We've tried ignoring them. But the fact remains that they're being led around by the nose by a sexual abuser, a thief, a conman, a fraudster, an insurrectionist and an all around disgusting excuse of a human being. What's left? Civil war where they are soundly whipped, people die on both sides?? And for what? Because one repulsive and repugnant excuse of a humanoid wanted to be king of the world, a dictator, an omnipotent ruler of the peons?? There has been so much time to stop him... so many opportunities to shut him down... remove him... lock him up... And here we are, 8 years down the road from that first campaign when everyone already knew what he was but not quite HOW bad it was going to get and still.... he's out there lying and bullshitting the same people AGAIN. I don't understand it, I will NEVER understand it but I do know that it simply cannot be allowed to continue. As a private citizen, yeah, Trump can invite whoever he wants to dinner...but given his record, his stated agenda if becoming President again, it is only prudent to be suspicious of every move he makes. Including whom he decides to 'invite to dinner'. 2 1 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Arrogant Worms Posted March 10 Share Posted March 10 Katie Britt's State Of The Union Border Trafficking Story Was Incredibly Misleading https://www.huffpost.com/entry/katie-britts-border-trafficking-anecdote-was-incredibly-misleading_n_65eca7e3e4b0dce30d247b8d Britt did not name the abuse survivor in her State of the Union rebuttal directly, but Britt’s communications director, Sean Ross, confirmed to The Washington Post that the story was about an activist named Karla Jacinto Romero, as Katz had suggested. While Britt made it seem like an example of recent lawlessness caused by Biden-era policies, the abuse Romero endured happened two decades ago, when George W. Bush was president. That fact alone has led many people on social media to ask how Biden can be to blame. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
112 Posted March 10 Share Posted March 10 3 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Arrogant Worms Posted March 10 Share Posted March 10 7 minutes ago, 112 said: That is how dumb Trump voters are. 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.