If the administrators at the insanely expensive school (the parents of 1,700 students pay tuition for all grades of $65,540 a year) are not embarrassed by that headline, they should be. Morons.
The school told families this week that “students who feel too emotionally distressed” after the election can get excused from classes, and—I find this incredible—psychologists will be available during the week to provide counseling for the tender souls who have presumably been told by their teachers and parents that they will be sent off to work camps and their parents will be executed in Trump wins.
The message to parents “acknowledges that this may be a high-stakes and emotional time for our community. No matter the election outcome will create space to provide students with the support they may need.” Excused absences will be allowed on Wednesday or whatever day the election results are announced for those students who are unable to “fully engage in classes.”
Any student who doesn’t immediately recognize this as a “Get Out Of School Free” ticket is too dim-witted to be in school.
“…And that’s the millionth reason I’m fervently hoping and desperately praying that Harris prevails. I believe Biden to be a good man who has done much good for us…”
—Long-time progressive NYT pundit Frank Bruniin one of the “Harris must win, Trump is terrible” stories and columns in the Times today.
I counted 11 of the latter. Twelve. Nah, there’s no mainstream media bias! Whatever would make you think that?
Bruni has been a member of the Times staff and editorial board for 25 years. Res ipsa loquitur. The Times has at least one (they have, in truth, many) columnist who had a regular platform to spread his biases and misconceptions, and he thinks (or says he thinks) Joe Biden is a good man. Right. There are few politicians of such longevity who have ever left such an unambiguous record of not being a good man, woman, or public servant. Since I’m not writing a book, I’ll just list the bits of Joe’s biography that stick out for me at the moment:
It was a competitive field to be sure, but O’Donnell, who once aspired to be a respected and trustworthy journalist, displayed how far she has fallen with her despicable performance on today’s “CBS Evening News.” You want bias? You want disinformation? You want unprofessional and unethical conduct? You want Trump Derangement? Norah had it for you. CBS should suspend her, or at least send her to a spa to calm the hell down. CBS, however, is a hack organization now employing hack journalists in complete lock-step with the Axis of Unethical Conduct. No, neither Norah nor CBS are quite as corrupt as MSNBC, but that is faint praise indeed.
Main article: “Trump at the Garden: A Closing Carnival of Grievances, Misogyny and Racism. The inflammatory rally was a capstone for an increasingly aggrieved campaign for Donald Trump, whose rhetoric has grown darker and more menacing.“
#2: “Inside the Movement Behind Trump’s Election Lies”
#3: “Far-Right Figures Escalate Talk of Retribution and Election Subversion“
A ways down the page we see, “A Trump Rally Speaker Trashed Puerto Ricans. Harris Reached Out to Them.” Added: I didn’t read the piece, but the headline was misleading and deliberately so. The “speaker” was a comedian, and he was doing a routines. Ah. So the idea is that his jokes were meant seriously, and because it was a Trump rally, Trump endorsing the jokes as if they were serious positions.
On Twitter/”X,” the advocacy organization “Restore Childhood” documents the horrific case study of a little boy pushed into “gender affirming care” by his woke-lunatic mother, facilitated by unethical medical professionals. Below is the tweet series. You can watch the disturbing videos here.
1. The surprise move has sparked a “Nah, there’s no mainstream media bias” spectacular! Editor-at-large Robert Kagan, resigned in protest. “People are shocked, furious, surprised,” said an editorial board member. Wait: why does the staff care so much that the Post isn’t officially endorsing Harris? They care because they are partisan and biased. They want their paper to do everything it can to help Harris and defeat Trump, not to to report the news objectively, and not to be officially neutral. That the staff reacted this way tells us all we need to know about the Post’s trustworthiness, if we didn’t know it already.
2. Endorsements were justifiable when newspapers maintained some semblance of objectivity. In today’s rotting journalism, however, with “advocacy journalism” holding sway and the Post being a particularly flagrant offender (I cancelled my Post subscription because the New York Time was less biased!) an endorsement doesn’t mean what it once did. That was, “We have assessed the candidates and their positions. We now can state our measured conclusion: X is the responsible choice for voters.” Now, an endorsement only means, “We have been favorably reporting on the Democratic candidate while being relentlessly negative about the Republican candidate, and all our reporters and editors are Democrats and progressives. Of course we’re endorsing X.”
1. Are there any videos of Trump supporters acting like this? As with the many episodes of violence against citizens wearing MAGA caps: if the Trump supporters are the Nazis, why is it that the Democrats are the only ones engaging in violence and harassment?
2. I asked this question of a Trump Deranged relative today. The “But Trump…!” answer I got was “What do you call the Capitol riot?” I call it a bunch of idiots trying to remedy what they thought was an attempt to steal a Presidential election through a protest that got out of control. It was not Americans targeting those whose political views did not align with theirs.
(I’ve been waiting for just the right opportunity to post that (badly acted) clip from “Plan Nine From Outer Space,” and this story is perfect.)
Amber Matthews, 23, a social justice warrior who literally doesn’t know what she’s protesting and furious about, thought she was tearing down a string of Israeli flags at a New Jersey restaurant. She proudlposted the video of her vandalism—but good vandalism, see, because Jews are evil—on TikTok.
Oopsie! They weren’t Israel flags, they were Greek flags. See the difference? (Hint: One has a cross, and the other has a Star of David…)
Tough one! Hey, anyone could make that mistake…especially an ignorant, self-righteous moron.
In the video, Matthews screams while she is tearing down the flags,“Free Palestine! What are you looking at? You know damn well there’s a genocide. I’m taking this shit down.” She adds, “I don’t stand for it. There’s genocide, and I don’t stand for Zionism.”
Actually, her brains is so clearly atrophied that its a miracle she can stand at all…
This would be evidence of historical and geographical ignorance even if the woman did tear down Israeli flags. There is no Palestine, the Palestinians are 100% responsible for that fact, and a nation waging war after being attacked isn’t “genocide.” (Jews know what genocide is.) Having and loudly proclaiming an uninformed opinion is bad. Using the uninformed opinion as justification to destroy private property is much worse, and destroying the wrong property is more unethical still. Then she posted evidence of her crime as if it was something to be proud of, when in reality it is something that should require Matthews to wear a bag over her head for the rest of her life.
The New York Post reports that she’s been arrested and charged. Good.
I love this Comment of the Day. It is as perfect an example as we will ever see of a thoughtful, careful, articulate, and civil rebuttal of a post or position here. This COTD, by EA veteran Zanshin, focused on my disgust regarding the New York Times’ self-indicting and desperate attempt to cover for Kamala Harris’s claim that she worked for McDonald’s as a student (you know, part of that humble middle class upbringing) by criticizing Donald Trump for not accepting her word as Discovered Truth. Harris asserting that anything happened is not evidence, based on her well-documented proclivities. In particular, I pointed out that a Kamala Harris résumé that didn’t list her supposed stint as a burgermeister was deceitfully employed by the Times to imply that her claim is true.
I apologize for getting this up a bit late; I didn’t not expect subsequent events, like Trump’s master-trolling of Harris (and the Times) by doing a campaign stunt having him acting like a McDonald’s employee, the absurd tantrum thrown by the Axis over it, Tim Walz whining on “The View” that the stunt was “disrespectful” to Mickey D employees (How?), and still, neither the company nor the Harris campaign has produced any evidence that Kamala’s tale isn’t in the same category as Walz’s claim that he was in combat and Joe Biden’s claim (among others) that his uncle was eaten by cannibals.
The Times appears to be unfamiliar with the concept of “burden of proof.”
I love the comment and admire it, but as I stated in the thread, I don’t agree with it, though it is a “lucid, intelligent, well thought out” argument.
That was my first thought when I read Jack’s statement (promise? warning?threat?) “I have yet to ban a commenter for doing no more than saying the mainstream media isn’t flamingly, ostentatiously, democratically and destructively biased in favor of progressives and Democrats, but the day is coming, and it’s coming fast.”
But the part in above statement regarding Jack’s judgement about the mainstream media is rather broad and at some places even vague. (note 1) And therefore very hard to prove or disprove
So, I decided to set myself a smaller task. Can I find an example in this blogpost where Jack writes negatively about mainstream media while not warranted by the facts. An example that even might suggest that Jack is a little bit biased against the mainstream media.
I think I have found such an example. Bear with me. The example I want to discuss is the one where Jack discusses the text in the Times regarding Ms. Harris having worked at McDonalds or not.
Because, you see, much as I try to present myself as otherwise, I’m a sap. All year I’ve been reading about how the WNBA’s players are discriminated against because they don’t get anywhere near the money that their male counterparts do, that pro women’s basketball was surging in popularity, that finally it was sinking in that women were just as good at the game and fun to watch as the NBA’s freaks, and that social justice had arrived at last.
Nah. The WNBA lost 40 million dollars this past season, and that with its player earning what they skills were worth based on the demand to see them. Feminists and social justice trolls have been trying the same scam as they worked with some success in soccer, claiming that the higher men’s compensation was based on discrimination. No, it was based on reality: supply and demand, popularity, and biology.
Tough one! Hey, anyone could make that mistake…especially an ignorant, self-righteous moron.
