Everyone is gone at the Washington Post... Almost no Metro section left...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What is the Posts obsession with race? You cannot seem to go by a day without some piece on race in America. Paper is garbage.

+1
And sexuality/gender/ethnicity, etc. I posted about this a few months ago on a different thread, but I noticed the difference between the WaPo and WSJ immediately. The WaPo deliberately weaves in race, gender, etc. issues to *every* article. They cannot just write a piece without making some sort of -ism the focus. The WSJ, on the other hand, will take a story about real estate, for example, and cite several couples. Tim and his husband David, or Jane and her partner Stella, for instance. (Or Sally and her husband Pete, etc. you get the point) That's the only reference to their sexuality. Just an intro to cover the basics. They never patronize their audience, they simply state the facts, interview a wide range of people, and get on with it.

They weave race into every piece, EXCEPT when decsribing the race of violent felons. Then they have a blanket prohibitionon identifing black men. White men are identified as "white shooter' but black men are referred to as simply 'shooter'.

Which is hilarious because black men commit about three times the shootings that white men do.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People who don't subscribe to newspapers who complain about the news should shut the fkcu up. You're part of the problem.

No, we should not. Sorry you don't like the stance or the opinion. I would tell you that it is you that should SFTU but its easier to let you keep talking so people see what you say and make up their own mind, like a adult would.

You are a freeloader. If you don’t pay, then don’t read (and definitely don’t complain). Newspapers are not charities.

No, I chose not to support businesses that hate me. There are alot of ways to consume news these days. Sorry newspapers have become irrelevant.

I think the problem here is that you're an idiot. But, please, feel free to get all your news from your neighbor's slow cousin's blog. Sounds like that's more your speed anyway.

Ad Hominem, thats ok. You can't win the argument. But keep trying. You may be that participation badge at some point.

Your argument was "I don't want to buy a newspaper." Ok, well, thanks for sharing. Not really an argument or even very interesting. Educated people though read newspapers and they support newspapers because democracies cannot function without them.

No, my argument was I don't buy from news sources that hate me. Last time I checked, WSJ is a newspaper. And please spare me the lecture on democracies. the US is not one. It is a Constitutional Republic. Do you or someone in your family work for WaPo? You sure seem offended.

I agree that the WSJ is a legit newspaper and better then the Post in many ways, but a constitutional republic is absolutely a type of democracy. I'm not sure why you think we're not.

In case I missed something, in the Pledge of Allegiance, the line is "and to the Republic for which it stands" I did not hear the words "and to the democracy"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What is the Posts obsession with race? You cannot seem to go by a day without some piece on race in America. Paper is garbage.

+1
And sexuality/gender/ethnicity, etc. I posted about this a few months ago on a different thread, but I noticed the difference between the WaPo and WSJ immediately. The WaPo deliberately weaves in race, gender, etc. issues to *every* article. They cannot just write a piece without making some sort of -ism the focus. The WSJ, on the other hand, will take a story about real estate, for example, and cite several couples. Tim and his husband David, or Jane and her partner Stella, for instance. (Or Sally and her husband Pete, etc. you get the point) That's the only reference to their sexuality. Just an intro to cover the basics. They never patronize their audience, they simply state the facts, interview a wide range of people, and get on with it.

They weave race into every piece, EXCEPT when decsribing the race of violent felons. Then they have a blanket prohibitionon identifing black men. White men are identified as "white shooter' but black men are referred to as simply 'shooter'.

Which is hilarious because black men commit about three times the shootings that white men do.

+1. So true. It’s Pravda for the DC elite class.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:A recent article about the rails-to-trails movement, accompanied by a color photo of --- wait for it -- the C&O Canal towpath!

I miss the days of long ago with the trains gently floating down the canals. That and the streetcars that could take you from coast to coast, before Big Oil bought them all.

[Anonymous]

A democracy is two wolves and a sheep deciding what is for dinner. A republic is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What is the Posts obsession with race? You cannot seem to go by a day without some piece on race in America. Paper is garbage.

This may be shocking to you, but race is clearly something that America grapples with. Just because you don't want to talk about it, doesn't mean that it doesn't exist. Clearly, it makes you uncomfortable. Poor baby.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What is the Posts obsession with race? You cannot seem to go by a day without some piece on race in America. Paper is garbage.

This may be shocking to you, but race is clearly something that America grapples with. Just because you don't want to talk about it, doesn't mean that it doesn't exist. Clearly, it makes you uncomfortable. Poor baby.

No, America does not grapple with it. Blaks and dems grapple with it. Not the rest of us.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What is the Posts obsession with race? You cannot seem to go by a day without some piece on race in America. Paper is garbage.

This may be shocking to you, but race is clearly something that America grapples with. Just because you don't want to talk about it, doesn't mean that it doesn't exist. Clearly, it makes you uncomfortable. Poor baby.

DP. No. America does not "grapple" with race. Only certain subsets of Americans - in the vast minority - consider race to be an all-consuming topic, to be discussed endlessly. That subset is made up almost entirely of white liberals.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People who don't subscribe to newspapers who complain about the news should shut the fkcu up. You're part of the problem.

No, we should not. Sorry you don't like the stance or the opinion. I would tell you that it is you that should SFTU but its easier to let you keep talking so people see what you say and make up their own mind, like a adult would.

You are a freeloader. If you don’t pay, then don’t read (and definitely don’t complain). Newspapers are not charities.

No, I chose not to support businesses that hate me. There are alot of ways to consume news these days. Sorry newspapers have become irrelevant.

I think the problem here is that you're an idiot. But, please, feel free to get all your news from your neighbor's slow cousin's blog. Sounds like that's more your speed anyway.

Ad Hominem, thats ok. You can't win the argument. But keep trying. You may be that participation badge at some point.

Your argument was "I don't want to buy a newspaper." Ok, well, thanks for sharing. Not really an argument or even very interesting. Educated people though read newspapers and they support newspapers because democracies cannot function without them.

No, my argument was I don't buy from news sources that hate me. Last time I checked, WSJ is a newspaper. And please spare me the lecture on democracies. the US is not one. It is a Constitutional Republic. Do you or someone in your family work for WaPo? You sure seem offended.

I agree that the WSJ is a legit newspaper and better then the Post in many ways, but a constitutional republic is absolutely a type of democracy. I'm not sure why you think we're not.

In case I missed something, in the Pledge of Allegiance, the line is "and to the Republic for which it stands" I did not hear the words "and to the democracy"

Not sure if you're trolling or just a bit slow, but a republic is a type of democracy. Are you implying only direct democracy counts as democratic government? If so, sorry to hear about that F you got in 7th grade civics class.

[Anonymous]

The Washington Post is becoming a parody of itself. It's nearly unreadable.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The Washington Post is becoming a parody of itself. It's nearly unreadable.

+1
And has been for some time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The Washington Post is becoming a parody of itself. It's nearly unreadable.

I honestly don’t know how the Post concluded that becoming such a race and gender-obsessed publication would appeal to any significant number of people interested in subscription-based journalism.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Good. Let that rag die.

What is your alternative recommendation?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Good. Let that rag die.

What is your alternative recommendation?

WSJ has been impressive lately imo. I used to dismiss it as too conservative, but I think it’s more centrist and reasonable than anything else.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Good. Let that rag die.

What is your alternative recommendation?

WSJ has been impressive lately imo. I used to dismiss it as too conservative, but I think it’s more centrist and reasonable than anything else.

It absolutely is. I’ve been reading it for 20+ years. I used to read the NYT religiously for longer than that, but they became insufferable. I finally cancelled last year after their disturbing “puberty” section geared towards kids. That was the last straw.