• Bernie Sanders’ Anti-Amazon Bill Is an Indictment of the Media, Too
    25 replies, posted
https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/bernie-sanders-amazon-bezos-725282/ This new piece of legislation sounds audacious at first. It tells companies like Amazon: if you pay your workers so poorly that they have to go on food stamps, the government is going to hit you with a 100 percent tax on such subsidies.
That ever lingering feeling of regret constantly fingering it's way up your anus every time this man opens his mouth.
For a video on this matter https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SJhsm2DSfAg It's phrased in a way that is very pro-conservative-values while still accomplishing his goal, its actually very brilliant. Sadly the dickheads in office won't care about it.
"We're pro-welfare, as long as the welfare is for rich white guys in suit and ties who are CEOs" What the fuck is this guy on about? Instead of linking a biased journalist, OP's article provides a great overview of the discussion from both sides.
I don’t think I’m breaking news when I say that while Sanders appreciates good journalism, he believes the media in general has been grossly deficient in its mission to educate audiences about serious social problems. He said this last year: “You can turn the TV and watch it hour after hour, channel after channel after channel, and not see one relevant piece of information.” CNN = Trump is bad Trump is bad Trump is bad Trump is bad Trump is bad Trump is bad Trump is bad Trump is bad Trump is bad Trump is bad Trump is bad Trump is bad Trump is bad Trump is bad Trump is bad Trump is bad Trump is bad Fox News = Socialism is bad Socialism is bad Socialism is bad Socialism is bad Socialism is bad Socialism is bad Socialism is bad Socialism is bad Socialism is bad Socialism is bad Socialism is bad Socialism is bad Socialism is bad Local news = (700 Synchronized voices) This is a threat to our democracy Not one relevant piece? Even I thought that was harsh. But this is who Sanders is. His idea of what’s normal and acceptable media coverage and what isn’t is a little different from most. And it’s become increasingly clear that he’s lost patience waiting for the news media to pay attention to this particularly loathsome problem of CEOs using public subsidies to pad their bottom lines. lmao with how shit Amazon is, it's no fucking wonder he doesn't like the media. They would rather divert conversations instead of talking about the issue. Translated, this means: Bernie has enough poll support now that he can finally hire all the Beltway bullshit artists who spent the last 40 years turning the Democratic Party into a subsidiary of the Chamber of Commerce. Translated, this means: Rolling stone loves being inside of its own ass
The moral requirement to make money though
I'm not entirely sure you read my post correctly, or perhaps the meaning of my post was lost by my wording. I'm essentially saying the DMC fucked up. Bernie should be president.
Bernie Sanders should've been our god damn President. Just imagine all of the Anti-trust lawsuits that'd be flying out.
Maybe I just read it badly, I guess it could still apply to a "I don't like Bernies idea" post
He's absolutley right though. You have shitstain "social conservatives" bitching and whining about welfare recipients wasting tax dollars, but cost-cutting corprate policies have been creating a system that funnels money from the government in to at both ends. Supercenters and online retailers pay employees well below the living wage, causing them to turn to welfare to survive. In turn, they go to these bargain price retailers for thier living essentials and any small luxury they can afford, effectively monopolizing the moneyflow of the underclass. It's a country wide expansion of the "company store" model that once led to labor revolts in the US, just hidden by a veneer of free choice.
And now unions are super weak. Democrats need to make a major shift to labor rights to win elections imo, appeal to the working class, but their corporate masters won't allow that.
I think in the long run, it's going to be a net gain. There was a stunning galvanization of younger voters during the primaries, and the energy of the primaries never really ran out. The Republican Party backing Tinyhands and continuing to back him and their flagrant disregard for the law and really just everything in general is exhausting, but it's also a constant reminder of what the Party is. It's lending progressive causes a sort of constant fuel source. The more time passes, the worse Tinyhands gets, the closer Mueller gets, the harder it gets for the Republican party to pretend like they're somehow not responsible for Tinyhands and that he's not any kind of problem People are getting increasingly dissatisfied with both political parties, and they've also seen that they can actually affect the system. The choking smog of apathy is starting to thin out a little, the idea that you should fucking vote is starting to shift the hip ironic cynical your vote doesn't matter maaaaan way of thinking that has plagued the political landscape for unbearable decades As the Republican Party and their golden boy get worse, it gets that much more difficult for reactionary rhetoric to take root. the Democratic Party's status quo hasn't been faring that much better, either. There's been a wave of political upsets, it's being shown that Sanders sent a shockwave through the Democratic party and we still haven't seen the aftereffects yet. Not only are there more people pushing for change and putting their power to vote to use again, they are succeeding in affecting change. Even just a handful of small gains are wins, and even a small win can have a huge boost on people's overall morale It's not over by a long shot, but I think the future isn't nearly as dark as it could be. There's a lot of scary shit on the horizon, no question, but I don't think it's hopeless. I think there's still a real opportunity for the United States to make some massive steps for the better
Hello, enlightened centrist - tell us of your wisdom. CNN is shit, but it's not as simple as them being as bad as Fox News. MSNBC could give Fox a run for their money, but even they're far less toxic.
Look at how fucking red his face is, he's going to absolutely explode
Thanks for putting that image in my head: https://files.facepunch.com/forum/upload/242634/5888e5f4-258c-4d9b-8ef7-e2103a941d99/image.png
You know, when the vote was still up in the air I was actually arguing with my girlfriend at the time that I wanted Trump to win for this exact reason. Everyone in Scotland knew prior to him even running for office how much of a blatant asshat he was, completely morally corrupted and used bullying tactics against the everyday person to exact his goals. My argument was that since the US already has an issue with corruption, him winning will drag all this corruption out into the street for everyone to see and like you said, the apathy would fade. Now that we are years into the term I feel like I may have been wrong in that assumption. Sure, the swamp has become apparent but not in the sense I imagined. I expected all the pre-existing swamp folk to be dragged into the limelight as they agree with policy but they have actually kept incredibly quiet. Mainly because Hillary lost and the entire corrupt side of the dems has been in hiding since and so the corruption has only really been evident with the republican party, but even that is hard to spot because Trump has brought so many useless nameless people into the game to gain his own corrupt ends that were essentially just business partners and friends from his former business life. The republican party has taken heavy losses in their credibility but I don't think corruption will be handled any better than previously, I didn't expect Trump to be QUITE such the hateable figurehead that he is which has essentially taken the spotlight off of the politics and onto him. Sometimes I think people forget that we don't live in a Monarchy anymore with the way the media treats this. Putin said it well himself, as ironic as it is coming from that guy of all people. He has spoken with multiple US presidents in his time in office. Yet even though their policies changed wildly, even when it came to Russian politics, the conversation and engagements never changed, no matter who was in office the messages, threats and treaties were all the same and came from the same source. The UK and US are just as much an oligarchy as Russia is, the same career politicians that have been there since the 60's and 70's have sat through multiple presidencies. This topic has barely touched media, instead we are being given headline news articles about Trumps mushroom dick. I can't say I'm not disappointed, and I"m not entirely sure it's Trumps fault.
Calling out a corperate news source like CNN is far from centerist lol
They are a corporate news source, but it just sounded like you were saying they are just as bad as Fox News, and that they are not. I don't think it's far left to make the judgements he's making though.
Which is why it's so significant that there's a tide of people who are voting and know their vote matters These career politicians didn't just get there, the US is nothing like the oligarchy of Russia. The fact that is anything approaching the political upset in the United States at all should stand as proof of that. The Republican Party is worried, openly talking about being worried. Right on the front of this part of the forum is a piece of news about Ted Cruz, and how he is worried about the blue wave. The part where he's worried it could turn Texas into California 2.0 isn't the important part of the headline, the important part of the headline is he is worried about a blue wave at all The Republican Party is a party full of criminals, but they're nothing like Putin's government. They have nowhere near the same level of power. They know their power has limits, that's why they're so heavily invested in their rhetoric. Political opponents of Putin's government get polonium poisoining, neurotoxins, suicide by two bullets in the back of the head, tragic falls (from first story apartments), or just plain old gang beatings. Political opponents of the Republican Party get smeared on FOX news and Sinclair affiliates Putin's oligarchy has a level of control even the worst of the worst of the worst within the United States and United Kingdom can only dream of, and you need only look at the reactions to the protestors within the United States and United Kingdom and the ones within Russia. They're just not comparable. Thousands of people in the UK cheered on a baby Tinyhands balloon. Theresa May is a national punchline(Strong and stable!). Literally every single day the United States collectively mocks Tinyhands right out in the open with no fear of repercussion. The media is constantly holding up a magnifying glass to his administration and oh yeah there is an active god damn FBI investigation into Donald Trump that has the Republican Party scared shitless for some mysterious reason, to the point where they're willing to sell all their credibility out right now to get the deck stacked every way they can. Parties with power like Putin's don't do that. Putin owns the police. Do the Republicans strike you as owning the FBI? Those career politicians got there because people voted them in and, more importantly, not enough people voted against them, and on top of all that, nobody has voted them out, because the United States has been choking in the grip of a deathly smog of apathy and complacency. We've just gone over how the United States still has a broadly functioning democracy. Things don't change unless people get out and change them, and there's a great big demographic that's come of age during the last financial crisis and its repercussions and they are going out to make these changes happen If you didn't foresee him being this hateable a figurehead, you weren't paying nearly enough attention. To Tinyhands or his detractors. Have you forgotten what the primaries were actually like? People talked about his million and one failings a lot. I grew up knowing about Donald Trump and that he was a massive prick, but the vast majority of what I know about him now comes from just the last few years of this election cycle What media do you actually consume? What are your primary sources? Can you give me a list of them? Because on the whole, it sounds like they're kinda letting you down. Are many of them Sinclair affiliates? You might want to check I mean, c'mon, this is Rolling Stone. It's an entertainment magazine. Is Rolling Stone really the best yardstick for the media at large? Why aren't any of your sources reporting on the literal hundreds of questionable things this administration and the government is doing every single god damn day and has been for the last two years? Or did you have some other topic in mind? What outlets are reporting on that topic if so? I have been somewhat saturated in this kind of news daily, through one vector or another, for the last three years now, and it's getting a little hard for me to understand how people don't know about all this shit unless they are not nearly as well informed as they think they are. I literally cannot avoid being informed about Tinyhands and this administration I don't even spend that much time on it reading it. The most time I spend is on these posts testing what I've learned and spreading knowledge where I can, and even then that rarely takes more than an hour The system ain't that broke. There's just a lot of dirty people who have a vested interest in you thinking it is, 'cause that allows them to hang on to power even longer, 'cause if you don't vote, and your friends don't vote, and their friends don't vote, and they all spend their time talking about how broken and useless the system is, discouraging other people to vote, how the hell is the system supposed to work? The system kinda relies on all those people voting instead of jerking each other off about how Democracy doesn't work Democracy does work, but you have to have enough people participating in the system Politics is a four letter word, but it shouldn't be
Firstly I'm not at all saying that the US and Russia's politics are at all similar, they are however to some extent Oligarchies in the sense that the same families have been in the US political system for a very very long time, this is the point I was trying to make. While the news headlines are talking constantly about Ted Cruz and members of the public facing republican party we are experiencing and entire lack of coverage of those that were never in the spotlight to begin with, such as the Rockefeller and Rothschild families who have been pulling the strings of not only the US but many countries politics and policies for a long ass time. I mean you're quire reinforcing my point here. We are so focused on these in and out people who yes were voted in that we are taking these others people, groups and families out from under a scrutiny that was barely there to begin with. I'm not for a moment saying that the worlds problems are attributed solely to these people but the money that finances these politicians who we ARE watching closely is coming from these groups that transcend any particular administration, they are there as a constant. The mainstream media is only attacking the tip of the iceberg, the last in the production line that is politics, we don't hear shit from the Arms industry heads who have key stakes in policy direction and international politics and may only be mentioned in passing, such as Theresa May's husband being a major shareholder for a corporation that deals in Arms trade when she makes unsanctioned, unapproved attacks against external states. It's this kind of corruption I am addressing, not this dog and pony show on TV.
Its easy to hold these positions when you aren't the one at risk from their dangers. He legitimized naxis walking on streets? What good does he bring to anyone?
I certainly didn't advocate the man or wish him all the best but I think in the long run it will be better for the US than if HIllary had won and things went on as normal. The spotlight is back on the whitehouse and it's affiliates and that is a good thing. The amount of news that is coming out regarding politics is breathtakingly fantastic and gives hope for the future.
You make a number solid points and I am broadly inclined to agree with them. Especially with regards to there needing to be a much bigger spotlight on a lot more of the old money within the United States(Ever hear of Standard Oil?). That's a clarification I really needed, thank you I would still like to know where you're getting the bulk of your news, though. I am kind of completely tired of playing the guessing game and seriously need a better idea of where people are primarily sourcing their news. I need to know where I'm not covered and where I need to be providing more coverage
Thanks for that, apologies for not making my point clearer the first time round. I don't get my news from any particular source, I subscribe to no one particular paper and as many people on FP hatefully know I am typically distrustful of the majority of the news I receive from mainstream media and usually double up my info from foreign sources and sources which disagree with eachother regularly and try to read between the lines as best I can on political matters. As South Park so rightfully put it, everything is an ad, that goes for politics too.
Then could I at least get an idea of what qualifies as mainstream media? I don't mean to hound that much, but it's another turn of phrase I find thrown around a lot but I don't get a lot of opportunities to nail down exactly what and who it actually means. The only ones I know with any kind of certainty are rags like CNN and actual tabloids like Salon
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.