Sign in to follow this  
bpm57

More of saying the quiet part out loud

Recommended Posts

“Your help has been extremely important because not only have you continued to amplify some of the things that we’re trying to do here, but you’ve been in the weeds and you’ve talked about the very policies that have been knocking around for a long time and that we finally have been able to get together and put into a plan. So I want to thank you for your advocacy as well.”

Biden policy adviser Jared Bernstein to Stephanie Ruhle near the end of her "interview" on MSNBC

Is presenting a (D) infomercial as news bad, or is it only bad when (R) do it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, bpm57 said:

“Your help has been extremely important because not only have you continued to amplify some of the things that we’re trying to do here, but you’ve been in the weeds and you’ve talked about the very policies that have been knocking around for a long time and that we finally have been able to get together and put into a plan. So I want to thank you for your advocacy as well.”

Biden policy adviser Jared Bernstein to Stephanie Ruhle near the end of her "interview" on MSNBC

Is presenting a (D) infomercial as news bad, or is it only bad when (R) do it?

Can someone translate this? It's tempting to assume it's just more Bupkis57 screeching "Dem=BAD!!" but since he's actually quoting something real, ought to be given benefit of the doubt

- DSK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Steam Flyer said:

Can someone translate this? It's tempting to assume it's just more Bupkis57 screeching "Dem=BAD!!" but since he's actually quoting something real, ought to be given benefit of the doubt

- DSK

Just something else that will turn out to be bullshit, and when it does, the bullshitter who bullshitted it will be off bullshitting about something else instead of manning up and taking responsibility for his bullshit. Bullshitters do what their parents taught them to do. They bullshit. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Without some context, it's impossible to know whether or not this is a federal crime. However, I can only find the offensive words on RedState but not on MSNBC.

https://redstate.com/jeffc/2021/01/16/stephanie-ruhle-joe-biden-n311097

https://www.msnbc.com/stephanie-ruhle

It should be noted that Ruhle was one of the journalists who broke the London Whale story. Those are some weeds.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephanie_Ruhle

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Olsonist said:

Without some context, it's impossible to know whether or not this is a federal crime. However, I can only find the offensive words on RedState but not on MSNBC.

https://redstate.com/jeffc/2021/01/16/stephanie-ruhle-joe-biden-n311097

https://www.msnbc.com/stephanie-ruhle

It should be noted that Ruhle was one of the journalists who broke the London Whale story. Those are some weeds.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephanie_Ruhle

Is Biden above the law yet?   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are still some journalists out there who refuse to drink the Reich-Wing propaganda Kool-Aid 

Why is it a bad thing for Dems to thank them for doing that ? 

@bpm57   could have easily given us a critique of the Dem COVID relief bill, 

but he chose not to do that - instead he just threw out the usual Reich Wing ad hominems. 

It's really hard to respect that . . 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Steam Flyer said:

Can someone translate this? It's tempting to assume it's just more Bupkis57 screeching "Dem=BAD!!" but since he's actually quoting something real, ought to be given benefit of the doubt

- DSK

AYFKM?

Consider the source.. How much proof do you need.

It's just more brainless drivel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, bpm57 said:

“Your help has been extremely important because not only have you continued to amplify some of the things that we’re trying to do here, but you’ve been in the weeds and you’ve talked about the very policies that have been knocking around for a long time and that we finally have been able to get together and put into a plan. So I want to thank you for your advocacy as well.”

Biden policy adviser Jared Bernstein to Stephanie Ruhle near the end of her "interview" on MSNBC

Is presenting a (D) infomercial as news bad, or is it only bad when (R) do it?

!gasp!... ain't you a petty, handwringing cunt.

no word on your boi's recent random and spiteful 'environmental deregulations'? then Fuck you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, bpm57 said:

“Your help has been extremely important because not only have you continued to amplify some of the things that we’re trying to do here, but you’ve been in the weeds and you’ve talked about the very policies that have been knocking around for a long time and that we finally have been able to get together and put into a plan. So I want to thank you for your advocacy as well.”

Biden policy adviser Jared Bernstein to Stephanie Ruhle near the end of her "interview" on MSNBC

Is presenting a (D) infomercial as news bad, or is it only bad when (R) do it?

I literally have no idea what you're talking about.  Can you try again please?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Burning Man said:

I literally have no idea what you're talking about.  Can you try again please?

Don’t encourage him. Once more is twice as many as desirable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, AJ Oliver said:

There are still some journalists out there who refuse to drink the Reich-Wing propaganda Kool-Aid 

Why is it a bad thing for Dems to thank them for doing that ? 

@bpm57   could have easily given us a critique of the Dem COVID relief bill, 

but he chose not to do that - instead he just threw out the usual Reich Wing ad hominems. 

It's really hard to respect that . . 

 

Dude, knock it off with the constant "reich wing" bullshit!  It's gotten old.  It's pretty much the same thing as when every sentence from @Polytelum Tom contained the phrase ".22" in it.  I'd give anything for a version of "dogballs" for this phrase.  

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Burning Man said:

knock it off with the constant "reich wing" bullshit! 

why would he do that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Burning Man said:

Dude, knock it off with the constant "reich wing" bullshit! 

Not gonna happen - that appellation is reserved those who deserve it, 

and has even been approved in a PA poll. 

Don't think I have used it on you, have I ?? 

It is this Elk  . . 

image.jpeg.2894ee51c13cf6ab1695ff4a96f98542.jpeg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, SloopJonB said:
2 hours ago, Steam Flyer said:

Can someone translate this? It's tempting to assume it's just more Bupkis57 screeching "Dem=BAD!!" but since he's actually quoting something real, ought to be given benefit of the doubt

 

AYFKM?

Consider the source.. How much proof do you need.

It's just more brainless drivel.

Gotta keep trying.

Sensible policy debate doesn't always smoke a pipe and wear a sportjacket with elbow patches. OTOH it -never- crouches in the bushes shouting "FUCK YOU! Martians invaded my bathroom! Fuck you! Windmills cause cancer! Fuck!! BENGHAZI!!!" so I don't blame you for not listening every time.

- DSK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, jerseyguy said:

Don’t encourage him. Once more is twice as many as desirable.

Gouda cheese, I will get another slice and listen to my daughter chat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Steam Flyer said:

Can someone translate this? It's tempting to assume it's just more Bupkis57 screeching "Dem=BAD!!" but since he's actually quoting something real, ought to be given benefit of the doubt

- DSK

He's pissed off that news channels think that Biden may be a better president than Turnip, and he's really pissed off that *something happened* which is about .01% of how Faux News treated the Mango Moran through his entire maladministration.

In other words, white idiot privilege.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, 3to1 said:

TopKaren is 'Reich-lite'. imo.

Is Reich-Lite a thing ? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Sol Rosenberg said:

Just something else that will turn out to be bullshit, and when it does, the bullshitter who bullshitted it will be off bullshitting about something else instead of manning up and taking responsibility for his bullshit. Bullshitters do what their parents taught them to do. They bullshit. 

Sorry, can some one please point out the "offensive" words?

Am I allowed to thank a reporter for reporting the loss of my job when it highlights the plight of the unemployed and helps people get new jobs?

 

Thanking a reporter for reporting is offensive? Only in totalitarian world.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, hasher said:

Gouda cheese, I will get another slice and listen to my daughter chat.

Oude, Yonge or Belaga? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, AJ Oliver said:

Is Reich-Lite a thing ? 

ya, more or less.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Shortforbob said:

Oude, Yonge or Belaga? 

Everyone knows, I am quite dense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, hasher said:

Everyone knows, I am quite dense.

Old Gouda, Young or medium aged :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Shortforbob said:

Old Gouda, Young or medium aged :)

From the old country...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Shortforbob said:

Sorry, can some one please point out the "offensive" words?

Confirmation bias, on the telly, that's all.

6 hours ago, Burning Man said:

I literally have no idea what you're talking about.  Can you try again please?

Jeffie, you could try harder, with many.

 

Stephanie Rule displays a set angle, every night; she has a very predictable bucket list. A Biden administration figure complimented that angle, on air.  (This is not unlike Mulvaney making nice with Hannity, after Hannity strokes Team Trump...)

This is good work for @bpm57. He is getting more astute, and his expression has actually developed a bit. He even started a thread and drew the observations of heavy hitters. This guy has pretty good RWNJ company here, and could choose to hang out in worse places.

Edited by jocal505

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, jocal505 said:

This is good work for @bpm57.

Still waiting for him to put his grown up words to use and 

give us a substantive argument about the proposed COVID relief legislation. 

Come on BPM, you can do it. We're are rooting for ya. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The bar is being repositioned as we speak.

We'll be expected to forget that SOME networks let admin reps spew unquestioned and uncontested for minutes at a time.

Day after day.  Week after week.  Year after year.

NOW each and every word matters, and will be fact-checked to the moon.

Day after day.  etc

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/17/2021 at 10:28 AM, bpm57 said:

“Your help has been extremely important because not only have you continued to amplify some of the things that we’re trying to do here, but you’ve been in the weeds and you’ve talked about the very policies that have been knocking around for a long time and that we finally have been able to get together and put into a plan. So I want to thank you for your advocacy as well.” 

Biden policy adviser Jared Bernstein to Stephanie Ruhle near the end of her "interview" on MSNBC

Is presenting a (D) infomercial as news bad, or is it only bad when (R) do it?

One would have to have their head fully injected into their morass to not recognize that many "journalistic" resources have become advocacy organizations of politics ... Fox and MSNBC are just the flavors du jour, and it's been happening since at least the days of the Yellow Kid, because the newspaper business (and by extension the TV news business and social media business) become tools of the biggest advertisers, the ones who pump the money to pay the big bills.

There are exceptions ... I've always felt that my ex-employer the Wall Street Journal did a good job with keeping the fence sturdy between editorial and publishing, but then they had a somewhat easier time of it, since like the Financial Times, they are more of a business media than a political media. But even then, a single truthful, but even mildly brutal story used to cost the WSJ lots of advertising, but they ate it, and as far as I know, at least my own editor did what he did, and sometimes got shit for it from the publisher. Similarly, Fox has done an excellent job with their Fox Sports, the revenue stream for Fox Sports isn't typically the focus of their media.

But the second you shift gears into politics, it becomes really hard ... even the New York Times veers into advocacy. It's nearly impossible to avoid (unless you have your own internal funding sources like the Christian Science Monitor)  because politics becomes so intertwined with wealth, and such a life-defining kind of outlook, that advertisers view this advocacy as a way to sell product. And it works.

To answer your question, it's not good when anyone does it. BUT ... a news consumer should be sufficiently aware of how the donuts are made that one should seek out alternative sources for the same news. It doesn't need to be an everyday kind of thing, but it should be done now and again to at least understand how the filthy business of journalism works. It used to be easy ... one need only stop at the newsstand before they went into the office and buy a copy each of the New York Times, the Daily News, the New York Post, Wall Street Journal, International Herald Tribune, Christian Science Monitor, Financial Times, and then compare the same story from different modes of advocacy. The method behind the madness wasn't hard to identify if you were willing to put in the work. Smaller markets made it a little more difficult ... when I was a kid I couldn't understand how The Rocky Mountain News and the Denver Post and Westword could report the same story in such different ways, after all, wasn't truth equal to truth?

But now, it's easier in one way, we can search these stories up on our phones or computers, but side-by-side analysis is harder, and the paradoxical lack of immediateness and lithography with internet news makes it harder. If I look up a story about the House Foreign Affairs Committee, I might get the one about the committee in Britain, or D.C., or it might be one from last month, with the dateline updated for some reason, and then the lack of permanence in the death of lithography means that these stories can and do morph over time ... gone are the days of the editorial correction, now the original story is often updated with no visible record to the change. In the old days, after the day was done, the newspapers went into the trash, and the next day's batch of newspaper started the process all over again.

 

In a way, this internet seems to have made lazy news consumers even more lazy. And this is what we get, advocacy as news, news as advocacy, and both of these rolled into the advertising and profit machine. It's hard to believe that just a couple decades ago, a newspaper reporter would have been fired or at least reprimanded for phoning in an interview that they could have taken in person. Now, we buy news with the interview filtered through two or even three layers of other media. And we're happy enough to get it ... "could not be reached for comment" is simply excluded because nobody gives a shit anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/17/2021 at 1:56 PM, AJ Oliver said:

 could have easily given us a critique of the Dem COVID relief bill,

I could of done many things, "professor", just as you or any of the other leftists in here could of given us a take on the Lt. Gov. of PA saying that the 1st amendment doesn't apply to those who believe fraud occurred in the election.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, bpm57 said:

I could of done many things, "professor", just as you or any of the other leftists in here could of given us a take on the Lt. Gov. of PA saying that the 1st amendment doesn't apply to those who believe fraud occurred in the election.

Do -you- believe that fraud occurred in the 2020 election?

Other than the half-dozen or so documented Republican fraudulent votes, that is. A couple of Trumpettes in NC apparently voted twice, for example.......

- DSK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, bpm57 said:

I could of done many things, "professor", just as you or any of the other leftists in here could of given us a take on the Lt. Gov. of PA saying that the 1st amendment doesn't apply to those who believe fraud occurred in the election.

From where I sit, the Trump fanboys not only got to exercise their first amendment rights, they used it as an excuse to piss and stomp all over the rights of their fellow citizens when they raided the capitol. 

May I humbly suggest you try another talking point? 

Your own team fucked up that line of 'reasoning' up for say...oh, I dunno.. a generation or so?   

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this