CBS should just close up shop on their news division and focus on entertainment. The last week was just pathetic for them. I feel bad for Bill Whittaker, he gave a decent interview and had it butchered by the Harris Clean Up Crew.
By now, anyone who follows politics and the media know that a call went out from the Harris campaigns media boss to their friends at CBS News to "massage" the interview, and CBS agreed.
The trick is to figure out which one of these two is least likely to get your kids killed in some stupid war that is really none of our business. I think I’ll vote Trump in that regard.
I've wondered at times whether a third party could gain some sort of foothold in American politics. I've hoped for this. I was somewhat inspired by Ross Perot's campaign in what seems like the halcyon age of the '90s. When a political scandal was, in the end, just a cigar.
These third parties get hijacked. I know you're a big Kennedy guy, but is there any way he'd hold up? It's a stupid, brutal world out there, and the extremists rush in as soon as there's a glimmer of not stupid. Mob mentality rules, and thinking people cannot fight it.
I sound defeatist, and maybe I am to an extent. Neither Harris nor Trump has earned my vote. I don't think anyone can in the age of TikTok. We are witnessing the decline of civilization and it's not comfortable in the slightest.
The libertarians are our only solution to the current problem, but the party is so incompetent right now that they can't seize the moment. We need a Milei to win that victory before the US economy fails completely.
I'm currently reading Nevil Shute's "On the Beach." I'm struck by how civilized and respectful the (fictionalized) Australians of that era are as they face certain death .... in six months or so. I don't even want to imagine what Americans would do, how we would behave, what civilizational standards would be maintained if we all knew we were going to die of radiation poisoning in some number of months. If that novel were written today, I wonder how our society would be portrayed.
Perhaps CBS should release some of the transcript every day. Maybe a little bit on one day, a little bit more the next, a little bit less the following day. They could have a transcript calendar and put a red X on it for every day they release some of the transcript.
The edit in question seemed silly, anyway. The original answer said nothing. Neither did the second answer. Both were salady in that they were some approximation of what a politician does when she does not want to answer a particular question. The second version was simply a smaller salad.
Ultimately, though, whatever CBS releases or doesn't release... we can't exactly trust that it's the full interview. They're obviously hiding something else in there or many something elses, and we'll never see the full extent of it.
Their mistake was not including the bigger word salad when they decided to pretend to release the full transcript. It would have been embarrassing, but now it's a complete mess that actually is having an impact on the polls. CBS ended up doing the exact opposite of what it intended to do: provide campaign help for Harris.
Sadly, there really aren't any media outlets that I trust. CBS, and ABC, are one step above Fox News, a low step. I spend a lot of money to get "News" from several outlets, left, right and middle. Honestly, The Free Press is one of the better outlets in the US>
Engaged voters get it - they understand CBS and the regime media are not fit for purpose. They cannot be trusted. Unfortunately, these outlets still have influence with casual news consumers and disengaged voters. It’s sad and pathetic. On the bright side, this influence is crumbling in real time and should be much less pervasive by 2028.
Just read the memo of October 8 2023 from CBS cautioning against calling Hamas members terrorists. What’s interesting is that it does agree that the US government considers Hamas a terrorist organization. But it cautions against referring to individual members of this terrorist organization as terrorists, because some may believe Israel stole their land. What they’re really saying is that some individuals may believe that Hamas’s terrorism is an appropriate response to what they believe Israel did. I don’t see how that doesn’t make them terrorists. It just makes them terrorists who believe Israel stole theirland and therefore their actions are justified.
Seems to me that even if you do believe Israel stole your land, if you join a terrorist organization, you’re a terrorist. CBS doesn’t agree, I guess. Maybe CBS is of the opinion that some individual members of Hamas joined it not because of the terrorism, but because they appreciate the group’s position on Israel. I guess CBS reporters should refer to individual Boy Scouts as “young people who enjoy the outdoors.” Because maybe that’s why they joined, right? Don’t call them scouts, that might not be what they are.
Also, why, one day after the massacre, is CBS so pre-emptively concerned about how it is going to refer to individual Hamas members? Is it planning to interview them, already? When would that ever come up?
If Donald Trump wants to make an issue out of election manipulation, no matter how hyperbolic you find it, he is on solid ground in this case.
The mainstream media, since 2020, has been very focused on voter suppression, talk about stuffed ballots, and Trump calls to Georgia. What has never been disputed, however, are things like the James Comey insertion into 2016 or the laptop suppression in 2020, signed off by some of our most senior intelligence officers. These were inexcusable insertions into the infoormation veracity on which we rely as free citizens. Allowing rampant use of mail-in ballots a month before elections is similarly problematic for related reasons.
Those choices to manipulate information close to an election, not to mention the fabricated, Steele Dossier which started out as paid opposition research that unleashed four years of hearings, is why so many people will dig in and support Trump, regardless of what it does to the country for another four years.
This collusion between private companies and the government has to stop. It is rampant in our defense industry. It is becoming very common in our scientific endeavors. If we are going to become a nation of propaganda driven by one of the political parties, let’s just call it what it is: PRAVDA (truth).
I was watching the PBS Newshour last night -- it's rare that I do so anymore, though I used to like it when Gwen Ifil was still alive and she worked with Judy Woodruff -- sometimes I check in to see what David Brooks has to say, but again, since Mark Shields is gone the Friday night back-and-forth has gone downhill.
Anyway, last night their White House reporter gave a report on "abortion bans" in the US. I am struck by the constant reference in MSM to "abortion bans." Abortion is not banned anywhere in the US. Yes, some states restrict it to before a certain number of months. But that is not a "BAN." It's just outrageously propagandistic and prejudicial -- and abhorrent, since we are actually talking about unborn human beings.
Pamela, you are so right. When the Dobbs decision came down, I believe IT (Dobbs) would have ranked 8/9 MOST liberal GLOBALLY in terms of weeks within which to allow an abortion.
Once you dehumanize the fetus, and strip an unborn of any rights and protections, we really do return to the world Nietzsche foresaw (strong over weak).
But it would require informed voters to know any of this, not propagandized citizens.
And then there are Senators like Schumer who peacocks around about flying women to NY for his version of medical tourism. You really have to work hard to get at anything approaching Truth.
Any organization that complains about disinformation I consider a propaganda puppet until proven otherwise. I am a liberal who is done with the excuses. Kamala is an awful candidate. She is not qualified to be POTUS. She conveys limited understanding of major issues and is clearly just a corporate shill. I won’t defend nor vote for Trump, but also not picking Harris. I wanted Harris to do well. I wanted her to be good. I have seen enough.
It took me weeks to go from where you are to now deciding to vote Republican. Or more precisely anti-Dem. It’s not a vote FOR Trump so much as for the administration that I believe will do the least long-standing harm to the country. Sadly, I believe that is Trump. Dems are hell bent on destroying the foundations on which America is built. I am so pained to say that as a lifelong but former Dem.
Your description of Harris's response as "generously characterized as word salad" is way off base. In no way could her response be characterized as word salad. Look it up. Describing her response in this way weakens your credibility. Word salad may manifest in those suffering from mental disorders and is a jumble of words resulting in incoherent speech, which is what Trump often does. Harris's comment is actually a well-crafted statement that is designed to not be specific.
Please. You are correct it has a specific meaning in a medical context. But it has taken a colloquial meaning in general public discussion. This happens all the time with language. quit being pedantic.
Yes. To me it reads as a very wordy way of saying that some of what Israel has done is a result of the US advocacy.
The second quote, to me, is troubling, not only because it seems to place the US at odds with Israel, but also because it’s a very wordy way of saying nothing. What does pursuing what is necessary to be clear on where we stand on the need for this war to end mean? Does that sentence have a subject and a verb, and where are they? Does it mean we are pursuing being clear on where we stand? Where do we stand? Do we want the war to end? Is there a need for the war to end? Where do we stand on that? Are we pursuing the answer to that?
Or does she mean that we are trying to be as clear as we can to Israel that this war needs to end? That seems pretty easy to say, in fewer words.
I have a feeling she did mean that last thing, and that her position is that the war does need to end. But she didn’t say that, for some reason. She’s talking around it. Some might say this is just another example of her poor speaking style. But I think that she’s being deliberately evasive. Saying “we are clear on where we stand on the need for the war to end” doesn’t exactly say where you stand on that. But maybe it looks like it does, to those who want to read that into it.
Either way, I don’t see this second quote as an improvement. And the fact that it is what they chose to substitute for the first one leads me to believe that, despite its evasiveness, it is the most coherent thing she said.
For me, I see the choice as being between her and Trump, because they are the two candidates. I do not think she could be worse than Trump. There are bad things than could happen should either of them win. It’s not a great choice. Voting for Trump because you don’t think he’s the best, but you fear what Kamala will do, voting for Kamala because you see serious problems with her, but you fear what Trump will do. Two sides of the same coin. The one difference between them is that we have experienced a Trump presidency and know what it will be like.
I see what Harris would do as much worse. There are communist parallels, threats to Free Speech, bad economic policies that would shift wealth out of the country, sterilizing kids who follow the gender piper off a cliff, laws that take those kids away from parents— there’s no comparison, Trump isn’t Deep State, that’s why they want him poisoned by media if not dead. The D party is sinister anti American authoritarian tyranny. No a thousand times NO.
After the convention I had hoped that KH had thrown off the hyper careful, saying nothing posture that being a number 2 needs to have. I had hoped she would be the brave and aggressive prosecutor of her youth. And she was that person for about 3 days.
Now she seems back to being afraid of offending people.
I'd bet the Ulysses in my pocket that she, herself, would like nothing better than to tell Israel that they are weapons-free - just take care of business, and if they need help, the Ike is standing by. But she seems too afraid of the progressive/university terrorist supporting wing of her party, to say anything like that. Although she was much more obviously pro-Israel, and pro-order at the DNC and everybody loved it.
The President needs to be, and should be, prudent - but afraid, absolutely not.
I'm still going to vote for her, because well, Trump. But I'm getting less happy about it.
But did CBS play fast and loose with the interview? Maybe.
I'm not sure a politician seeing the way an answer sounded and thinking they needed to be clearer and re-answering the question more thoughtfully, is such a huge problem - although if that happened, CBS and the campaign should fess up about it.
Comparatively, this is not Watergate, or sending Covid testing machines that were in super short supply for Americans to Putin. This later, which seems a very big deal to me, may have been covered at TFP, although I have not seen it here, or they may have done the "well everybody else has covered it, so what is there to say about it" thing.
It is a difficult line to draw, to criticize the legacy press (which they deserve) for crafting their ideology coverage by choosing what to write about and what not to, while making choses about what to write about and what not to - that does in fact, itself, craft a view of reality and what's important.
The thing with Putin is bad. But the right is spinning it as “well, that doesn’t show he was working in collusion with the Russians, and so Russiagate is a big hoax.” The Left is saying “see, he was working with the Russians all along.” They’re just shouting over each other and the story is lost. Trump cared more about Putin than his own people.
Why has this come down to a contest between the party who thinks Trump collaborated directly with the Russians, and the one who thinks he didn’t and the other one is crazy? It’s blinding people to what he actually did, which is bad. Giving Covid tests to Putin when people here can’t get them is bad. Putin even told him it would look bad for him, and not to let word out.
He doesn’t have to be engaged in actual collusion to be bad for the country. He seems to have an inappropriate relationship with, or fascination with, Putin. Can we all agree on that? Guess not.
Inflation, unvetted immigration,the middle east, child mutilation, etc. and your focus is on Covid Tests? It seems someone besides Trump has an inappropriate fascination.
I could not agree more. I disagree with many people on how we have handled Israel, but could someone please explain to me what the Harris administration would do? What does she believes? Israel is committing genocide, but we need to fund them? Or Israel is acting in self defense, but we wish they would be more careful when facing a threat to their existence? What do the Democrats believe? They have no position and offer no leadership. Ditto with Ukraine. “Winning” is not a plan. You need a strategy not a pep squad. The DNC has disgraced itself on foreign policy and needs to be removed.
I’m grateful to have this place as a bastion of talented journalists who will tell it like it is when the legacy media has ceased to be worthy of the status & platform they have been given. It’s beyond obvious how in the tank the vast majority are for Kamala & the Dems, this isn’t a good thing (nor would it be in reverse). 60 Min & CBS should be raked over the coals over this & so much more.
If the objective was to dispel the widely-held concern that Kamala Harris isn't very good at thinking and putting those thoughts into words then her campaign is doing a terrible job.
CBS should just close up shop on their news division and focus on entertainment. The last week was just pathetic for them. I feel bad for Bill Whittaker, he gave a decent interview and had it butchered by the Harris Clean Up Crew.
By now, anyone who follows politics and the media know that a call went out from the Harris campaigns media boss to their friends at CBS News to "massage" the interview, and CBS agreed.
Presstitutes.
I believe Trump has said some overblown things, but this, sadly was not one of them. I wish it was.
I feel nauseous at the prospect of voting for either major party, even though I attended the save the republic rally.
I guess it comes down to which type of lies I prefer: gaslighting or out-and-out bullshit.
Third party remains the option with the most integrity.
The third party vote and it's integrity won't be much help after the First Amendment, the Supreme Court, and national souvernity are in the adh heap.
The trick is to figure out which one of these two is least likely to get your kids killed in some stupid war that is really none of our business. I think I’ll vote Trump in that regard.
I've wondered at times whether a third party could gain some sort of foothold in American politics. I've hoped for this. I was somewhat inspired by Ross Perot's campaign in what seems like the halcyon age of the '90s. When a political scandal was, in the end, just a cigar.
These third parties get hijacked. I know you're a big Kennedy guy, but is there any way he'd hold up? It's a stupid, brutal world out there, and the extremists rush in as soon as there's a glimmer of not stupid. Mob mentality rules, and thinking people cannot fight it.
I sound defeatist, and maybe I am to an extent. Neither Harris nor Trump has earned my vote. I don't think anyone can in the age of TikTok. We are witnessing the decline of civilization and it's not comfortable in the slightest.
The libertarians are our only solution to the current problem, but the party is so incompetent right now that they can't seize the moment. We need a Milei to win that victory before the US economy fails completely.
I'm currently reading Nevil Shute's "On the Beach." I'm struck by how civilized and respectful the (fictionalized) Australians of that era are as they face certain death .... in six months or so. I don't even want to imagine what Americans would do, how we would behave, what civilizational standards would be maintained if we all knew we were going to die of radiation poisoning in some number of months. If that novel were written today, I wonder how our society would be portrayed.
Perhaps CBS should release some of the transcript every day. Maybe a little bit on one day, a little bit more the next, a little bit less the following day. They could have a transcript calendar and put a red X on it for every day they release some of the transcript.
The edit in question seemed silly, anyway. The original answer said nothing. Neither did the second answer. Both were salady in that they were some approximation of what a politician does when she does not want to answer a particular question. The second version was simply a smaller salad.
Ultimately, though, whatever CBS releases or doesn't release... we can't exactly trust that it's the full interview. They're obviously hiding something else in there or many something elses, and we'll never see the full extent of it.
Their mistake was not including the bigger word salad when they decided to pretend to release the full transcript. It would have been embarrassing, but now it's a complete mess that actually is having an impact on the polls. CBS ended up doing the exact opposite of what it intended to do: provide campaign help for Harris.
Sadly, there really aren't any media outlets that I trust. CBS, and ABC, are one step above Fox News, a low step. I spend a lot of money to get "News" from several outlets, left, right and middle. Honestly, The Free Press is one of the better outlets in the US>
Engaged voters get it - they understand CBS and the regime media are not fit for purpose. They cannot be trusted. Unfortunately, these outlets still have influence with casual news consumers and disengaged voters. It’s sad and pathetic. On the bright side, this influence is crumbling in real time and should be much less pervasive by 2028.
By 2028 we may all be required listen in Mandarin.
Just read the memo of October 8 2023 from CBS cautioning against calling Hamas members terrorists. What’s interesting is that it does agree that the US government considers Hamas a terrorist organization. But it cautions against referring to individual members of this terrorist organization as terrorists, because some may believe Israel stole their land. What they’re really saying is that some individuals may believe that Hamas’s terrorism is an appropriate response to what they believe Israel did. I don’t see how that doesn’t make them terrorists. It just makes them terrorists who believe Israel stole theirland and therefore their actions are justified.
Seems to me that even if you do believe Israel stole your land, if you join a terrorist organization, you’re a terrorist. CBS doesn’t agree, I guess. Maybe CBS is of the opinion that some individual members of Hamas joined it not because of the terrorism, but because they appreciate the group’s position on Israel. I guess CBS reporters should refer to individual Boy Scouts as “young people who enjoy the outdoors.” Because maybe that’s why they joined, right? Don’t call them scouts, that might not be what they are.
Also, why, one day after the massacre, is CBS so pre-emptively concerned about how it is going to refer to individual Hamas members? Is it planning to interview them, already? When would that ever come up?
If Donald Trump wants to make an issue out of election manipulation, no matter how hyperbolic you find it, he is on solid ground in this case.
The mainstream media, since 2020, has been very focused on voter suppression, talk about stuffed ballots, and Trump calls to Georgia. What has never been disputed, however, are things like the James Comey insertion into 2016 or the laptop suppression in 2020, signed off by some of our most senior intelligence officers. These were inexcusable insertions into the infoormation veracity on which we rely as free citizens. Allowing rampant use of mail-in ballots a month before elections is similarly problematic for related reasons.
Those choices to manipulate information close to an election, not to mention the fabricated, Steele Dossier which started out as paid opposition research that unleashed four years of hearings, is why so many people will dig in and support Trump, regardless of what it does to the country for another four years.
This collusion between private companies and the government has to stop. It is rampant in our defense industry. It is becoming very common in our scientific endeavors. If we are going to become a nation of propaganda driven by one of the political parties, let’s just call it what it is: PRAVDA (truth).
I was watching the PBS Newshour last night -- it's rare that I do so anymore, though I used to like it when Gwen Ifil was still alive and she worked with Judy Woodruff -- sometimes I check in to see what David Brooks has to say, but again, since Mark Shields is gone the Friday night back-and-forth has gone downhill.
Anyway, last night their White House reporter gave a report on "abortion bans" in the US. I am struck by the constant reference in MSM to "abortion bans." Abortion is not banned anywhere in the US. Yes, some states restrict it to before a certain number of months. But that is not a "BAN." It's just outrageously propagandistic and prejudicial -- and abhorrent, since we are actually talking about unborn human beings.
Pamela, you are so right. When the Dobbs decision came down, I believe IT (Dobbs) would have ranked 8/9 MOST liberal GLOBALLY in terms of weeks within which to allow an abortion.
Once you dehumanize the fetus, and strip an unborn of any rights and protections, we really do return to the world Nietzsche foresaw (strong over weak).
But it would require informed voters to know any of this, not propagandized citizens.
And then there are Senators like Schumer who peacocks around about flying women to NY for his version of medical tourism. You really have to work hard to get at anything approaching Truth.
Keep this scrutiny on CBS moving forward, TFP, you’re the only ones doing it. Shine a light, as the story on NPR did several months back.
Any organization that complains about disinformation I consider a propaganda puppet until proven otherwise. I am a liberal who is done with the excuses. Kamala is an awful candidate. She is not qualified to be POTUS. She conveys limited understanding of major issues and is clearly just a corporate shill. I won’t defend nor vote for Trump, but also not picking Harris. I wanted Harris to do well. I wanted her to be good. I have seen enough.
It took me weeks to go from where you are to now deciding to vote Republican. Or more precisely anti-Dem. It’s not a vote FOR Trump so much as for the administration that I believe will do the least long-standing harm to the country. Sadly, I believe that is Trump. Dems are hell bent on destroying the foundations on which America is built. I am so pained to say that as a lifelong but former Dem.
Your description of Harris's response as "generously characterized as word salad" is way off base. In no way could her response be characterized as word salad. Look it up. Describing her response in this way weakens your credibility. Word salad may manifest in those suffering from mental disorders and is a jumble of words resulting in incoherent speech, which is what Trump often does. Harris's comment is actually a well-crafted statement that is designed to not be specific.
Please. You are correct it has a specific meaning in a medical context. But it has taken a colloquial meaning in general public discussion. This happens all the time with language. quit being pedantic.
One wonders then if it was so good, according to you, a completely different answer was somehow recorded and aired?
Yes. To me it reads as a very wordy way of saying that some of what Israel has done is a result of the US advocacy.
The second quote, to me, is troubling, not only because it seems to place the US at odds with Israel, but also because it’s a very wordy way of saying nothing. What does pursuing what is necessary to be clear on where we stand on the need for this war to end mean? Does that sentence have a subject and a verb, and where are they? Does it mean we are pursuing being clear on where we stand? Where do we stand? Do we want the war to end? Is there a need for the war to end? Where do we stand on that? Are we pursuing the answer to that?
Or does she mean that we are trying to be as clear as we can to Israel that this war needs to end? That seems pretty easy to say, in fewer words.
I have a feeling she did mean that last thing, and that her position is that the war does need to end. But she didn’t say that, for some reason. She’s talking around it. Some might say this is just another example of her poor speaking style. But I think that she’s being deliberately evasive. Saying “we are clear on where we stand on the need for the war to end” doesn’t exactly say where you stand on that. But maybe it looks like it does, to those who want to read that into it.
Either way, I don’t see this second quote as an improvement. And the fact that it is what they chose to substitute for the first one leads me to believe that, despite its evasiveness, it is the most coherent thing she said.
She elides the issues like a narcissist. She’s uninformed, uninterested, and strings together bunches of words that express nothing.
The next person to chirp that they’re not voting for Harris, but fully aware that they’re voting for her handlers needs a bitch slap.
We’re talking about an extremely impactful position here, going to someone who’s only doing it for status. A narcissist. Unquestionably unqualified.
Trump’s the least of our worries.
For me, I see the choice as being between her and Trump, because they are the two candidates. I do not think she could be worse than Trump. There are bad things than could happen should either of them win. It’s not a great choice. Voting for Trump because you don’t think he’s the best, but you fear what Kamala will do, voting for Kamala because you see serious problems with her, but you fear what Trump will do. Two sides of the same coin. The one difference between them is that we have experienced a Trump presidency and know what it will be like.
I see what Harris would do as much worse. There are communist parallels, threats to Free Speech, bad economic policies that would shift wealth out of the country, sterilizing kids who follow the gender piper off a cliff, laws that take those kids away from parents— there’s no comparison, Trump isn’t Deep State, that’s why they want him poisoned by media if not dead. The D party is sinister anti American authoritarian tyranny. No a thousand times NO.
There is all of that, for sure.
After the convention I had hoped that KH had thrown off the hyper careful, saying nothing posture that being a number 2 needs to have. I had hoped she would be the brave and aggressive prosecutor of her youth. And she was that person for about 3 days.
Now she seems back to being afraid of offending people.
I'd bet the Ulysses in my pocket that she, herself, would like nothing better than to tell Israel that they are weapons-free - just take care of business, and if they need help, the Ike is standing by. But she seems too afraid of the progressive/university terrorist supporting wing of her party, to say anything like that. Although she was much more obviously pro-Israel, and pro-order at the DNC and everybody loved it.
The President needs to be, and should be, prudent - but afraid, absolutely not.
I'm still going to vote for her, because well, Trump. But I'm getting less happy about it.
But did CBS play fast and loose with the interview? Maybe.
I'm not sure a politician seeing the way an answer sounded and thinking they needed to be clearer and re-answering the question more thoughtfully, is such a huge problem - although if that happened, CBS and the campaign should fess up about it.
Comparatively, this is not Watergate, or sending Covid testing machines that were in super short supply for Americans to Putin. This later, which seems a very big deal to me, may have been covered at TFP, although I have not seen it here, or they may have done the "well everybody else has covered it, so what is there to say about it" thing.
It is a difficult line to draw, to criticize the legacy press (which they deserve) for crafting their ideology coverage by choosing what to write about and what not to, while making choses about what to write about and what not to - that does in fact, itself, craft a view of reality and what's important.
The thing with Putin is bad. But the right is spinning it as “well, that doesn’t show he was working in collusion with the Russians, and so Russiagate is a big hoax.” The Left is saying “see, he was working with the Russians all along.” They’re just shouting over each other and the story is lost. Trump cared more about Putin than his own people.
Why has this come down to a contest between the party who thinks Trump collaborated directly with the Russians, and the one who thinks he didn’t and the other one is crazy? It’s blinding people to what he actually did, which is bad. Giving Covid tests to Putin when people here can’t get them is bad. Putin even told him it would look bad for him, and not to let word out.
He doesn’t have to be engaged in actual collusion to be bad for the country. He seems to have an inappropriate relationship with, or fascination with, Putin. Can we all agree on that? Guess not.
Inflation, unvetted immigration,the middle east, child mutilation, etc. and your focus is on Covid Tests? It seems someone besides Trump has an inappropriate fascination.
I could not agree more. I disagree with many people on how we have handled Israel, but could someone please explain to me what the Harris administration would do? What does she believes? Israel is committing genocide, but we need to fund them? Or Israel is acting in self defense, but we wish they would be more careful when facing a threat to their existence? What do the Democrats believe? They have no position and offer no leadership. Ditto with Ukraine. “Winning” is not a plan. You need a strategy not a pep squad. The DNC has disgraced itself on foreign policy and needs to be removed.
I’m grateful to have this place as a bastion of talented journalists who will tell it like it is when the legacy media has ceased to be worthy of the status & platform they have been given. It’s beyond obvious how in the tank the vast majority are for Kamala & the Dems, this isn’t a good thing (nor would it be in reverse). 60 Min & CBS should be raked over the coals over this & so much more.
So….defenders of the legacy media as organizations that are supposedly about truth, not narrative….what do you have to say for yourselves?
If the objective was to dispel the widely-held concern that Kamala Harris isn't very good at thinking and putting those thoughts into words then her campaign is doing a terrible job.