I used the words "nice headline" because many politically-biased media outlets know that many will only read the headline and maybe the first paragraph. I have found on both left and right websites that the headlines aren't always supported by the words in the attached story.
If you see the Washington Post as "far-left" there is no world in which a rational person can have a discussion with you.
Please provide evidence that the Post "seemingly mourned" the death of al-Baghdadi.
Actually there is a Democratic Socialist Party, but no "Democrat-Socialist Party except in the minds of the non-rational. Oh, and by the way, the Democratic Socialist Party is not part of the Democratic Party to which Democratic Congress critters and presidential candidates belong.
The whole refusal to use the adjective "Democratic" has been almost exclusively used by Republicans in a disparaging manner since at least the 1940s.
Taking the last points first, today's Democrat Party includes Socialists. Actually, the Socialists seem to be holding sway in many policy areas. Ignoring them seems ride. We don't want to offend sensibilities, do we?
"Democratic" has an actual, specific meaning. Funny as it seems, all words do. Also funny is that Democrats from the Political Party reject this notion. They make up crap and assign that imaginary crap as a meaning to real words.
[h=2]dem·o·crat·ic[/h]
(dĕm′ə-krăt′ĭk)adj.1. Of, characterized by, or advocating democracy: democratic government; a democratic union.
2. Of or for the people in general; popular: a democratic movement; democratic art forms.
3. Believing in or practicing social equality: "a proper democratic scorn for bloated dukes and lords" (George duMaurier).
Lately, the Democrat Party seems consumed by the efforts of their leaders to shut down conversation, limit thought, burn down the market place of ideas and move power so far away from the people that they can't even see it anymore.
The Democrat Party is actively trying to eliminate democratic principles from our governance. So, no, the Democrat party is NOT democratic. They don't even allow a fair unbiased primary to select a candidate. They're a joke.
Is the Washington Post a liberal rag with a biased point of view always asserting the leftist ideas popular at any particular moment? Yes.
I put forth their coverage of the killing of bin-Laden and of al-Baghdadi.
According to Wapo bin-Laden was "
[FONT="]chief architect of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks on the United States"[/FONT]. According to Wapo, al-Baghdadi was an "austere religious scholar". C'mon, man!
Both led terror organizations. al-Baghdadi was also a rapist and a worked extensively on this hobby with minors he could round up and later put to death.
However, these two were killed under orders from different Presidents. Obama: Good! Trump: Bad! This Tarzan level, dichotomous presentation of the world is troubling.
Sadly, it infiltrates EVERYTHING they publish. It's just their way of catering to the Lynch mob(s) in front of which they frantically scramble, pretending to lead. It's a wag the dog kind of a dance at this point.
WaPo is not alone in this. Coverage of Trump's very successful Presidency is routinely getting around 90% negative coverage. Even the al-Baghdadi killing got 64% negative coverage. Whiskey Tango Foxtrot!
Astonishingly, many people don't even know that they are being lied to. Astonishing!
