• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

New York Times Finally Admits It's Just a Democratic Super PAC

Praxas said:
The result is the same for the people I listed. It benefits the wealthy and sticks it to the poor, middle aged, and those with pre-existing conditions. No amount of word smithing can change that.
Click to expand...

You said that already. How does it do that?
 
Marco Montana said:
It really sickens me to be honest, I used to enjoy just hearing what happened and then determining my own conclusion. It used to be

" Hello everyone I am Anchor News Host today a car drove off the highway killing 7 people, more information coming in soon we will keep you informed, back to you Bill"


Now its " Hello I am Anchor News host today a car ran off the road killing 7 people based on the sticker that said NRA on the rear window we suspect the driver was a White Supremacist racist alt right trump supporter.
Click to expand...

One thing Trump has done. He has has exposed the bias in the media more than it has ever been.

It was always there, it's just that people didn't know how pervasive it is.

SO know you know that when the NY Times 'analyzes' something like the GOP tax plan, they already have a conclusion( it's wrongheaded of course) , they're not really analyzing it.
 
Marco Montana said:
It really sickens me to be honest, I used to enjoy just hearing what happened and then determining my own conclusion. It used to be

" Hello everyone I am Anchor News Host today a car drove off the highway killing 7 people, more information coming in soon we will keep you informed, back to you Bill"


Now its " Hello I am Anchor News host today a car ran off the road killing 7 people based on the sticker that said NRA on the rear window we suspect the driver was a White Supremacist racist alt right trump supporter.
Click to expand...

Or a clip defending a certain WH official saying "yeah, the video was fake but the message was true".




A fair statement would be that "TV news" is garbage and is not in fact news. If you want news news you have to go to written publications. Those will still be biased but it's not nearly anything like TV news.
 
tres borrachos said:
I read the article, and I didn't see the part where the NY Times "finally" admitted to be a "democratic super PAC". Can you maybe post a better link to their admission?
Click to expand...

Tres, come on. You know they wrote that headline with a little tongue in cheek hyperbole. They weren't being literal.
 
LowDown said:
The New York Times turns to no holds barred political activism in opposition to the tax bill.



Journalistic standards are dead. RIP. Let the games begin.

This returns the newspaper business to the days of John Adams and Alexander Hamilton, when the papers were owned by the political parties and were absolutely transparent and vicious in their bias.
Click to expand...

Editorial boards and Opinion pages commonly come out and take a stance on an issue. Almost every paper's editorial board comes out for one candidate or another in local races. What about this is new?
 
shagg said:
You should check out The Federalist sometime.
Click to expand...

Thank you. I will look at it. But I believe you might have misread me.
 
Praxas said:
Tell me how this bill benefits the poor, those with pre-existing conditions and middle aged? There you go again defend the undefendable.
Click to expand...
It benefits the poor by doubling the personal exemption...

it's not a health insurance bill so pre-existing conditions are irrelevant...

"middle-aged" is not a demographic that can be targeted in any coherent way. There are just as many super wealthy middle-aged as there are those who are middle-aged and dead broke. To suggest that a bill need to blanketly help "middle aged" people shows just how ignorant the haters are.
 
LowDown said:
The New York Times turns to no holds barred political activism in opposition to the tax bill.



Journalistic standards are dead. RIP. Let the games begin.

This returns the newspaper business to the days of John Adams and Alexander Hamilton, when the papers were owned by the political parties and were absolutely transparent and vicious in their bias.
Click to expand...

The Federalist is your source?

:2rofll:
 
LowDown said:
The New York Times turns to no holds barred political activism in opposition to the tax bill.



Journalistic standards are dead. RIP. Let the games begin.

This returns the newspaper business to the days of John Adams and Alexander Hamilton, when the papers were owned by the political parties and were absolutely transparent and vicious in their bias.
Click to expand...
I read the link. Your source is The Federalist. It's only been around since 2013. Founded by Been Domenche who's has a right wing blog called Redstate.com. The only bias your referring to is yours. Insulting the NYT should be credible. Since the NYT is credible, since forever, I knew it wasn't true.

On a larger note, name one story they printed that was"biased". Please, just one.


Sent from my Z833 using Tapatalk
 
American said:
It's isn't Trump's plan, it's Congress'. Trump just wants something passed that provided some reform that he promised.
Click to expand...

Trump supports it so it is his plan too. Stop trying to pass the buck. Rushing to pass a tax bill that only 25% of Americans support is unconscionable. Not to mention how it will blow up the deficit.
 
Praxas said:
Nope just part of common sense that this tax bill is a "pay the wealthy" plan primarily while screwing everyone else. To oppose it is to oppose screwing the majority of Americans just to help less than 10,000.
Click to expand...

Since you are so knowledgeable about the plan, could you tell us what the plan will be once the Senate votes and after the conference is held between the Senate and the House. I don't have the ability to know the future, so I need to rely on you to provide it for me. Please provide detailed specifics. Thanks.
 
LesGovt said:
Since you are so knowledgeable about the plan, could you tell us what the plan will be once the Senate votes and after the conference is held between the Senate and the House. I don't have the ability to know the future, so I need to rely on you to provide it for me. Please provide detailed specifics. Thanks.
Click to expand...

Can't help you there. But I do know the Senate parliamentarian rejected the GOP "trigger" option.

This means the GOP Senate bill has a $1.093 trillion dollar shortfall that they need to offset/match with new revenues if they're going to use Senate Reconciliation rules.
 
Lowdown, throw me a bone


Sent from my Z833 using Tapatalk
 
LesGovt said:
Since you are so knowledgeable about the plan, could you tell us what the plan will be once the Senate votes and after the conference is held between the Senate and the House. I don't have the ability to know the future, so I need to rely on you to provide it for me. Please provide detailed specifics. Thanks.
Click to expand...

You'll have to show where I said that. We know what has been presented but hey, that would require you to do work and read. Can't have that now can we? Not surprised though because there are folks in the senate voting on a bill many haven't even read yet.
 
tres borrachos said:
I read the article, and I didn't see the part where the NY Times "finally" admitted to be a "democratic super PAC". Can you maybe post a better link to their admission?
Click to expand...

Hey wait, you saw it was LowDown posting and you really looked for it to have made sense? You give the benefit of the doubt, I like it :)
 
iguanaman said:
Trump supports it so it is his plan too. Stop trying to pass the buck. Rushing to pass a tax bill that only 25% of Americans support is unconscionable. Not to mention how it will blow up the deficit.
Click to expand...

Who says that? BTW, you're a big Obamacare supporter, and that was rammed through with bribery to boot. So don't give me that feigned concern for the public.
 
LowDown said:
The New York Times turns to no holds barred political activism in opposition to the tax bill.



Journalistic standards are dead. RIP. Let the games begin.

This returns the newspaper business to the days of John Adams and Alexander Hamilton, when the papers were owned by the political parties and were absolutely transparent and vicious in their bias.
Click to expand...

The federalist is using James O'Keefe's failed sting operation on the Washington Post to smear the New York Times????? :lamo:lamo:lamo

Will you people believe everything the right wing media tells you??
 
MaggieD said:
The question is, “Are we,getting the truth?” The only things we THINK we know and most believe are the “facts” presented by, in my opinion, the most biased media in the last at least fifty years.
Click to expand...

You are getting THEIR "truth". That's all.
 
Praxas said:
You'll have to show where I said that. We know what has been presented but hey, that would require you to do work and read. Can't have that now can we? Not surprised though because there are folks in the senate voting on a bill many haven't even read yet.
Click to expand...

Right here: "Nope just part of common sense that this tax bill is a "pay the wealthy" plan primarily while screwing everyone else. To oppose it is to oppose screwing the majority of Americans just to help less than 10,000."

So if we cannot read it, we don't know what changes have been made since the last time you saw something about the details. Now, since you can read the details where others cannot, please tell us what they are? You dodged this question the last time. Please answer it this time. Thanks.
 
LesGovt said:
Right here: "Nope just part of common sense that this tax bill is a "pay the wealthy" plan primarily while screwing everyone else. To oppose it is to oppose screwing the majority of Americans just to help less than 10,000."

So if we cannot read it, we don't know what changes have been made since the last time you saw something about the details. Now, since you can read the details where others cannot, please tell us what they are? You dodged this question the last time. Please answer it this time. Thanks.
Click to expand...

Even the GOP are saying the gist of it is still there so we DO know what the house passes and we do know what the senate is planning so please tell us what the big change is that will help the poor when the GOP try and kill the mandate for the ACA? Spare me your idiotic comments.
 
Praxas said:
Even the GOP are saying the gist of it is still there so we DO know what the house passes and we do know what the senate is planning so please tell us what the big change is that will help the poor when the GOP try and kill the mandate for the ACA? Spare me your idiotic comments.
Click to expand...

I just watched Shumer say that the Republicans were rewriting the bill as he spoke and that no one knew what was in the package. Which means that you don't either. You are telling what the results are when you don't know what the final specifics are. You need to become a publicist for the Dems or a fortune teller. Neither one will provide the correct news.
 
LowDown said:
The New York Times turns to no holds barred political activism in opposition to the tax bill.



Journalistic standards are dead. RIP. Let the games begin.

This returns the newspaper business to the days of John Adams and Alexander Hamilton, when the papers were owned by the political parties and were absolutely transparent and vicious in their bias.
Click to expand...

Don’t get it. What’s wrong with the editors campaigning on things they editorialized on? Seriously, what did I miss?
 
bubbabgone said:
Can you show the text of the parts of the tax plan that have you so upset?
Click to expand...

That's tough to do since they are still writing it while they're voting on it.
 
American said:
Who says that? BTW, you're a big Obamacare supporter, and that was rammed through with bribery to boot. So don't give me that feigned concern for the public.
Click to expand...

That ACA was debated for over a year. Your comparison is as lame as the bill you seem to support. You can't possibly even know what is in it and neither do the Senators that are about to vote on it. This will be the last straw for the GOP and prepare for backlash like you have never seen against those that passed this abomination.
 
LesGovt said:
I just watched Shumer say that the Republicans were rewriting the bill as he spoke and that no one knew what was in the package. Which means that you don't either. You are telling what the results are when you don't know what the final specifics are. You need to become a publicist for the Dems or a fortune teller. Neither one will provide the correct news.
Click to expand...

This is all the more reason to put this bill aside until next year. Voting on bill you have not read is not very good optics.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom