|
 |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Political Threads This section is for Political Threads - Enter at your own risk. If you say you don't want to see what someone posts - don't read it :hihi: |
10-16-2017, 07:40 AM
|
#1
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 10,310
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnR
[I]
I expect that the "normal" media will flay Murphy - they should. I also expect the media will not cover the Menendez bribery trial much because he is a dem. I expect that SNL will avoid Weinstein and flay Trump.
Would be nice if everyone was held to equal standards
|
Isn't that what Jim is not doing?
I have yet to see that the NYT hid the story like Jim stated - in fact, they broke it.
NBC has said that the story wasn't buttoned up - and others (on both sides) are criticizing them for not running w/it earlier.
Menendez has been covered extensively in the NYT and I can show you lots of links to it.
SNL skewered Weinstein this past week and said he should be in jail.
Murphy was covered last week and haven't seen anything since.
|
|
|
|
10-16-2017, 08:13 AM
|
#2
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 20,441
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by PaulS
Isn't that what Jim is not doing?
I have yet to see that the NYT hid the story like Jim stated - in fact, they broke it.
NBC has said that the story wasn't buttoned up - and others (on both sides) are criticizing them for not running w/it earlier.
Menendez has been covered extensively in the NYT and I can show you lots of links to it.
SNL skewered Weinstein this past week and said he should be in jail.
Murphy was covered last week and haven't seen anything since.
|
"NBC has said that the story wasn't buttoned up - and others (on both sides) are criticizing them for not running w/it earlier. "
And Salon, not exactly a conservative outlet, said NBC was holding that one story to unusually high standards of verifiability. Then SNL cut their jokes about Weinstein, because Lorne Micheals said "it's a New York thing". what the heck does that mean? Trump used to live in New York, they have no trouble poking fun at him, do they?
As for the NYT, here you go...
https://www.bostonglobe.com/lifestyl...XjP/story.html
From the article...
"Sharon Waxman writes that, as a reporter for The New York Times in 2004, she looked into allegations of sexual misconduct by Weinstein, and the role and responsibilities of a man named Fabrizio Lombardo, who was head of Miramax Italy but had no discernible experience or expertise in film and, according to Waxman’s reporting, was on the payroll merely to help Weinstein procure women.
“ After intense pressure from Weinstein, which included having Matt Damon and Russell Crowe call me directly to vouch for Lombardo and unknown discussions well above my head at the Times, the story was gutted,” Waxman writes.
I bet it's all just another vast right-wing conspiracy.
Fauxnews has nothing to do with this. This is about liberals in the media, who are happy to portray Trump as an abuser of women, but who previously bent over backwards to prevent multiple liberals from being outed as such (the Kennedys, Bill Clinton, Harvey Weinstein, Roman Polanski, etc...). It has nothing to do with me, it has nothing to do with Fauxnews (ha ha ha, that never gets old). It's about liberal hypocrisy, and about your inability, and Spence's inability, and WDMSO's inability, to ever admit your side has ethical lapses, or is ever guilty of hypocrisy. Despite mountains of evidence to the contrary.
Try. Making. That. Wrong.
|
|
|
|
10-16-2017, 08:34 AM
|
#3
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 10,310
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim in CT
"NBC has said that the story wasn't buttoned up - and others (on both sides) are criticizing them for not running w/it earlier. "
And Salon, not exactly a conservative outlet, said NBC was holding that one story to unusually high standards of verifiability. Then SNL cut their jokes about Weinstein, because Lorne Micheals said "it's a New York thing". what the heck does that mean? Trump used to live in New York, they have no trouble poking fun at him, do they? Do I have to explain the difference bt a Hollywood director and the Pres. of the US to you?
SNL ran skits w/Harvey this week including say he should be in jail - you are reading last week's news when they tried out some jokes that fell flat and they thought the audience didn't know who he was so they cut them.
As for the NYT, here you go...
https://www.bostonglobe.com/lifestyl...XjP/story.html
From the article...
"Sharon Waxman writes that, as a reporter for The New York Times in 2004, she looked into allegations of sexual misconduct by Weinstein, and the role and responsibilities of a man named Fabrizio Lombardo, who was head of Miramax Italy but had no discernible experience or expertise in film and, according to Waxman’s reporting, was on the payroll merely to help Weinstein procure women.
“ After intense pressure from Weinstein, which included having Matt Damon and Russell Crowe call me directly to vouch for Lombardo and unknown discussions well above my head at the Times, the story was gutted,” Waxman writes.
I bet it's all just another vast right-wing conspiracy. And the editor for the Times said he could not even remember being approached for the story. You're ignoring that they BROKE the story.
Fauxnews has nothing to do with this. This is about liberals in the media, who are happy to portray Trump as an abuser of women, but who previously bent over backwards to prevent multiple liberals from being outed as such (the Kennedys, Bill Clinton, Harvey Weinstein, Roman Polanski, etc...). It has nothing to do with me, it has nothing to do with Fauxnews (ha ha ha, that never gets old). It's about liberal hypocrisy, and about your inability, and Spence's inability, and WDMSO's inability, to ever admit your side has ethical lapses, or is ever guilty of hypocrisy. Despite mountains of evidence to the contrary.
Try. Making. That. Wrong.
|
Your hypocrisy (how many times have we discussed that  ) in ignoring Faux news has everything to do with this. You constantly ignore 1 side and only discuss the other side because it fits your agenda.
Last edited by PaulS; 10-16-2017 at 08:45 AM..
|
|
|
|
10-16-2017, 08:16 AM
|
#4
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 20,441
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by PaulS
Isn't that what Jim is not doing?
|
No, it's the opposite of what I am doing. Meaning, you could not be more wrong. I am not engaging in partisan double standards, I am calling out those who do so.
|
|
|
|
10-16-2017, 09:00 AM
|
#5
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 10,310
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim in CT
No, it's the opposite of what I am doing. Meaning, you could not be more wrong. I am not engaging in partisan double standards, I am calling out those who do so.
|
But the double standards is exactly what you constantly do here.
|
|
|
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:31 AM.
|
| |